A couple of possible Dem candidates weigh in
Wednesday, Jan 25, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From US Rep. Cheri Bustos, who has floated her name for governor…
“Gov. Rauner’s first two years have been an epic failure that has pushed our state to an unprecedented crisis point. Under his downturn agenda, our state’s most vulnerable citizens are unable to count on services they should be able to take for granted, including domestic violence shelters, home health assistance or child-care assistance for low-income households. More than ever, Illinois needs a leader in the Governor’s Mansion. I urge Gov. Rauner to put aside his ideological war on working families to do the job he was elected to do and pass a budget.”
* And here’s Chicago City Treasurer Kurt Summers…
As Governor Rauner delivered his State of the State address, there remains more than $11 billion in bills that the state owes to vendors and service providers. There are 1 million people who have lost services, including mental health and substance-abuse treatment, HIV prevention services, and programming for victims of domestic violence. And, our budget deficit will remain $5.3 billion if the Governor continues his stubborn and partisan aversion to compromise. What we heard was nothing more than a campaign speech from a Governor who still hasn’t figured out how to lead. We heard no new ideas, and despite his claims, we have seen no effective attempt to work across the aisle to find solutions. In fact, we have seen our Governor actively work to divide us and enhance the partisan rancor that is preventing any real progress. The people of Illinois are sick and tired of waiting for real leadership.
Governor Rauner: You said you’re frustrated. Well, we are too. In these past 18 months, you have consistently treated the black, brown, poor, and working class people of Illinois as acceptable collateral damage. You had an opportunity to be a bipartisan leader, but you have put ideology and your own interests first, while failing to comprehend that your inaction is contributing to a vicious cycle of poverty, violence, and community instability in the places you pretend to be an advocate for - across all Illinois. In order to make real progress, we need leadership that can harness our collective focus on a balanced budget, meaningful education funding reform to fix our schools, and a jobs plan that works for all of us.
* As I said the other day, Sen. Kwame Raoul’s consultant/fundraiser is now working for Raoul’s friend Chris Kennedy, so he may not be in this one, but here’s his statement…
While I appreciate the governor calling attention to some serious issues within our criminal justice system, we need to recognize that real change will only come about if we invest in our neighborhoods. I recently passed legislation in the Senate that offers comprehensive trauma recovery services in communities with high levels of violent crime. If Governor Rauner is serious about ending the cycle of violence, I hope he will approve this measure.
Additionally, the governor has let another year go by without a plan to provide state services to people with disabilities, mental health issues or addiction. Every day without a budget is a day that some of our most vulnerable citizens lack access to the help they need.
As we reflect on the state of our state, we must recognize how much worse our financial situation has become under Governor Rauner’s leadership. Before the governor took office, we had paid down our backlog to a 30-day cycle. We now have an unprecedented $11 billion in unpaid bills. It is not hard to see that the difference between then and now is who is sitting in the governor’s office.
We must make it a priority in the coming days and weeks to end this stalemate. I am ready to work with anyone who comes to the table with real solutions and a willingness to compromise.
* She’s not a gubernatorial candidate, but Comptroller Susana Mendoza defeated Rauner’s hand-picked incumbent last November and is up for reelection in less than two years…
Take all the governor’s “alternative facts” out of his speech and The State of the State is: Leaderless.
He said he’s “offered many proposals to achieve a truly balanced budget.” Where are these proposals? Article 8, Sec: 2 of the state Constitution gives one very clear direction to the governor: He must prepare a balanced budget and submit it to the General Assembly. Because he has failed to do that for two years, people around this state are suffering.
Because my job is to pay the state’s bills — with inadequate funds thanks to his failure to propose a balanced budget — I hear stories every day from child care providers in Chicago, from nursing home operators in Peoria, from state employees in Springfield having their surgeries canceled if they can’t come up with half the cash to cover their own surgeries.
It is obscene that while everyone else in Illinois is suffering, Gov. Rauner has more than tripled his personal income from $58 million to $187 million and funneled more than $50 million into his own re-election campaign; tens of millions more into other political campaigns. I don’t think he can connect with the working-poor college students who had to drop out of state universities because the state has cut MAP grant funding and the university has to cut programs. The high-flying rhetoric in his speech about making the state universities great, doesn’t paper over his proposal to cut spending on higher education by 30 percent.
His administration was able to find $4 million dollars to give bonuses to higher-level non-union employees in October just before the election, but they can’t find money to fund social service agencies around the state that care for our most vulnerable residents.
He seems to be living in an alternative reality where his lack of leadership is helping the state move forward and people aren’t suffering.
In the last two years, the state’s backlog of bills grew from $6 billion to $11 billion. When we finally pay those bills, we have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars of interest on them.
Our bond ratings have dropped on the governor’s watch. Last week, bond rating agency Moody’s identified the lack of a budget as the biggest threat to growth in Illinois – the single biggest drag on the state’s economy.
The state of our state does not begin to get better until the governor fulfills his constitutional duty to propose a balanced budget. He didn’t even list it as a priority in today’s speech. It’s good he thanked the leaders of the state senate. They’re doing his job for him.
Discuss.
19 Comments  
|
“Boss Madigan” wins
Wednesday, Jan 25, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* If you’ve been watching Twitter closely the past couple of weeks, you know that two competing parody accounts have started attracting followers, @BossMadiganIL and @BossRaunerIL.
The person(s) behind Boss Rauner just lost a big round…
Yep. He gone. Not sure what happened there.
* Speaking of Speaker Madigan, this is from Steve Brown…
The leadership selected for the 100th General Assembly will be:
Representative Barbara Flynn Currie, Majority Leader
Representative Louis Lang, Deputy Majority Leader
Representative Arthur Turner, Deputy Majority Leader
Representative Luis Arroyo, Assistant Majority Leader
Representative Dan Burke, Assistant Majority Leader
Representative Sara Feigenholtz, Assistant Majority Leader
Representative Mary Flowers, Assistant Majority Leader
Representative Jehan Gordon-Booth, Assistant Majority Leader
Representative Elaine Nekritz, Assistant Majority Leader
Representative Greg Harris, Conference Chairman
Representative Jay Hoffman, Assistant Majority Leader, non-compensated
Jay Hoffman in leadership? Man, Punkin Haid has really come a long way since Madigan stripped him of his committee chairmanship for working too closely with Rod Blagojevich.
Hey, maybe Scott Drury can one day work himself back into Madigan’s good graces, too. /s
…Adding… When Pat Quinn became governor, he continued using his lt. governor business cards and just crossed out the “Lt.” Did he get the House signage contract?…
10 Comments
|
What was up with that football stuff yesterday?
Wednesday, Jan 25, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Tribune…
Meanwhile, some details buried in the far-reaching proposal emerged as surprises, an example of legislators’ willingness to throw in anything but the kitchen sink if it means there’s a possibility the budget impasse that’s hampered universities and social service providers could come to an end.
One such “throw in,” as it was called by Sen. Kwame Raoul, D-Chicago, is an idea backed by the Chicago Bears aimed at cutting the amount of pay they have to dole out for injured players. Current law means they often have to cover injuries until a player is 67; they want that lowered to 35, contending most healthy players don’t play much longer than that.
Opponents, including players’ attorneys, argued that change would create a two-tier system. Supporters said the idea was to limit high-dollar payouts for players with expensive contracts, but conceded some work may still need to be done on the issue.
* From a group called the Illinois Sports Workers Compensation Task Force…
Professional athletes employed by sports teams in Illinois are among the highest paid employees in the state, but they are entitled to the same workers’ compensation rights as every other employee. Professional athletes file a sizable number of Illinois workers’ compensation claims. These claims inequitably compensate professional athletes and impose significant costs on the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission. Additionally, professional athletes abuse the workers’ compensation system by forum shopping. Several other states’ workers’ compensation laws exclude or reduce the workers’ compensation rights of professional athletes and prohibit professional athletes from forum shopping. Illinois should consider similar amendments to its workers’ compensation laws for professional athletes.
A Google search turned up nothing for the group, but I can’t help but wonder if its address might be 1410 Museum Campus Drive.
* The group distributed its full analysis (click here) to some legislators, but it has no real numbers or specific examples with names attached to them. They do cite this case…
Professional athletes employed by sports teams based outside of Illinois, forum shop by filing claims in Illinois in order to take advantage of Illinois’ favorable workers’ compensation laws. For example, several years ago, a professional football player employed by the Cleveland Browns filed an Illinois workers’ compensation claim based on a specific injury he suffered while playing in a football game in Illinois. This player chose to file a claim in Illinois instead of Ohio because he determined that he will receive a greater award under Illinois law. These types of claims show the inequities of Illinois’ workers’ compensation system, and waste the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission’s resources. Unless Illinois amends its workers’ compensation laws, Illinois may challenge California as the trendy state in which professional athletes file their workers’ compensation claims, regardless of the home state of the professional athletes’ employers.
13 Comments
|
* Senate President John Cullerton on the governor’s State of the State address…
“The Senate is well aware of the state of our state. That’s why we are working together to put an end to the budget impasse and restore economic stability to Illinois. Our state is filled with wonderful people and places. It is state government that has failed and fallen behind. Our efforts continue in the Senate to turn this around and I remain optimistic that we are near an agreement.”
That’s the best response I’ve seen today.
But optimism alone isn’t gonna pass that grand bargain.
* Tribune…
The complex package, including tax increases, as well as workers’ compensation changes aimed at helping business and a new plan to alter state worker pensions, met with heavy opposition from an alliance of business and unions.
Democratic senators said privately they were fearful that Republicans could not deliver the votes needed to reflect the bipartisan nature of the compromise plan.
They don’t need many. And Cullerton has come a long way since veto session, when he once again demand that Rauner set the tax hike level himself. And while he’s been saying for months that Republicans need to put a bunch of votes on any tax hike roll call, I’m pretty sure he’ll accept a fraction of that now.
* Meanwhile…
(T)he Illinois Policy Institute, a libertarian group that usually backs the governor, said that while he “has been able to make significant progress” in some ways, “he cannot do it alone.” To help out, the group adds that it intends next week to release its own plan to balance the budget without a penny of tax hikes.
That’ll be fun.
17 Comments
|
Question of the day
Wednesday, Jan 25, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Mayor Emanuel said this on WTTW last night…
Emanuel says Rauner has “abdicated” his leadership responsibility, by delegating negotiations on a resolution to the 18-month [impasse] to Senate President John Cullerton and Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno, and then sending “underlings” to undermine their bipartisan compromise framework.
* Today, the governor went “off script” in his State of the State address to say this…
* The Question: Do you believe the governor is finally ready to end this impasse and get to a deal? Make sure to explain your answer. Thanks.
72 Comments
|
* Press release…
House Speaker Michael J. Madigan, D-Chicago, issued the following statement Wednesday after Gov. Bruce Rauner’s State of the State address:
“As we chart a course for Illinois in the coming year, we should begin by focusing on where we can all agree. We all agree the state cannot continue to operate without a budget. Passing a balanced budget remains Illinois’ top priority, and a top priority of the House Democratic Caucus.
“We can also agree that Illinois must take serious steps to improve our business climate and create new job opportunities. But House Democrats reject the idea that the only way to create jobs in Illinois is to cut wages and strip away workplace protections in order to pad the profits of big corporations. Instead, we will work to advance an agenda of positive economic reforms that improve the business climate without hurting the middle class.
“We believe we can grow our economy and create jobs without hurting middle-class families. We can provide good jobs for working families while also passing policies that help businesses grow – those two ideas are not mutually exclusive to one another. Under my direction, the House will begin a thorough vetting process of proposals that will enable us to create jobs while also lifting up and helping the middle class and struggling families around our state.”
Pretty vague, but at least he’s talking about eventually talking about something.
18 Comments
|
* Press release…
A federal class action lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Illinois’ parole revocation process has been resolved with a guarantee that attorneys will be provided to eligible parolees and an agreement the state will take additional steps to bring fairness to the process of determining whether a parolee must return to prison due to a parole violation.
U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve approved the settlement agreement reached with the Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC) and the Illinois Prisoner Review Board (IPRB). Plaintiffs were represented by the Roderick and Solange MacArthur Justice Center and the Uptown People’s Law Center.
“The terms of the settlement, if implemented correctly, will guarantee that many parolees throughout the Illinois will receive state-funded attorneys to represent them throughout the revocation process,” said Alexa Van Brunt, an attorney with the MacArthur Justice Center and Clinical Assistant Professor of Law at Northwestern Pritzker School of Law.
“In addition, all parolees will receive key due process protections, including being informed of the evidence being used against them, the right to present a defense on their behalf and written findings at each stage of the process,” Van Brunt said. “Timelines will be set to speed the process and ensure that parolees do not languish in prison cells before IPRB determines whether they actually have violated terms of their parole.”
“The parole revocation process in Illinois has robbed parolees of their right to due process,” said Alan Mills, Executive Director of Uptown People’s Law Center. “They have been unable to speak on their own behalf at phony hearings, unable to present evidence in their defense, and unable to cross-examine adverse witnesses. In short, they have not received substantive hearings before a fair and unbiased decision-maker.”
Attorneys for the plaintiffs said the settlement, while not perfect, would allow changes to happen rapidly and not require a protracted trial on the allegations.
“The protections for parolees are substantial and if implemented effectively this agreement should end the revolving door between prison and our communities and reduce the number of people held behind bars throughout the state,” said Sheila A. Bedi, Associate Clinical Professor of Law at the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law and an attorney with the MacArthur Justice Center. “An independent monitor will be appointed to assist with the implementation of the changes and compliance with the settlement. If, for instance, a lack of state budget should cause the state to fail to uphold its end of the settlement, we can and most definitely will terminate the agreement and return to court.”
Terms of the settlement reached with IDOC and IPRB include:
• At preliminary and final hearings, many parolees will be represented by legal counsel provided by the state, if they meet certain criteria.
• Parolees will receive written notice of any alleged parole violation leading to revocation and written findings at each stage of the process.
• Parolees will be able to explain their side at a preliminary hearing before a hearing officer or an IPRB member. If determination is made that a parole violation did not occur, the parolee will be released. Previously, preliminary hearings were rarely held, and people sat for months before anyone heard their defense.
• If the preliminary hearing results in a determination that probable cause exists to believe a violation occurred, the parolee will be able to present his/her case for release at a final revocation hearing, conducted by members of the IPRB.
• IDOC and IPRB will adhere to deadlines for prompt hearings and final decisions.
• An independent monitor will be appointed to help IDOC and IPRB comply with the settlement agreement and report on the status of compliance.
Pretty interesting in light of the furor over the POTUS tweet on Chicago violence.
More background is here.
19 Comments
|
More react to Trump tweet
Wednesday, Jan 25, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Fran Spielman…
Nobody knows precisely what President Donald Trump meant by his threat to “send in the feds.” But if it means National Guard troops patrolling the streets of Chicago, African-American aldermen and community leaders want no part of it.
That includes Gov. Bruce Rauner, who discounted the idea on a morning radio appearance, and Cardinal Blase Cupich — who said we “should all welcome the help of everyone” to deal with violence, but still fell short of endorsing the use of the Guard. […]
Rauner, appearing on Steve Cochran’s morning show on WGN-AM (720) was asked whether Trump has reached out to him about Chicago violence. He said no. But he said his administration has been in conversation with the DEA and the FBI, as well as other experts.
“We continue to believe it’s not the right thing for us to send in the National Guard. That would be a mistake. But we are working, the Illinois State Police, we put a surge in there. We put more State Police up there to control the expressways. We’ve also have our State Police helping with the forensics and lab work and the investigation work that’s going on with CPD. I continue to try to do everything we can at the state level to help the city of Chicago deal with the violence.”
Rauner said he supports more equitable school funding, and adding vocational training to high schools to help young people get careers instead of joining gangs.
More money for crime prevention/disruption efforts would be nice.
There’s lots more react in that Sun-Times piece, so go read the whole thing.
It would be helpful if the President clarified his remark, but I’m not holding my breath.
* Tribune…
Chicago police Superintendent Eddie Johnson said Wednesday he’s baffled by the meaning of President Donald Trump’s latest tweet on Chicago violence but said he would oppose bringing in the National Guard if that is what the president is considering.
“The statement is so broad. I have no idea what he’s talking about,” Johnson said of Trump’s tweet Tuesday night threatening to “send in the Feds!” if Chicago “doesn’t fix the horrible ‘carnage.’ ”
In a telephone interview, Johnson told the Tribune he hasn’t been contacted by the Trump administration and didn’t believe Mayor Rahm Emanuel or other city officials had been either.
If Trump meant in his tweet that he might bring in the National Guard to help quell the city’s violence, Johnson said he would be opposed to that.
* Tribune…
Cardinal Blase Cupich, who was at City Hall to be honored for his recent elevation to cardinal, said the situation is “more complex” than one that can be dealt with simply by posting federal troops on Chicago streets. “The problem is surely much more complex than that type of a solution,”‘ he said. “I surely would welcome, and I think a lot of people would welcome, assistance on a multi-level basis, simply because the problem is not simple. It is complex and it can be improved if we all pull together.”
* ABC 7…
Deputy Mayor and Chief Neighborhood Development Officer Andrea Zopp sat down with ABC7 News This Morning to talk about the president’s tweet.
“We’ve talked long and hard that policing is not the sole answer here. If they are going to have help, certainly federal support and prosecution. But also making sure that we have jobs programs, that we have infrastructure investment to create jobs. Those are the kinds of things that are really going to help on this issue,” Zopp said Wednesday.
37 Comments
|
A quick look at the revenue angle
Wednesday, Jan 25, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* A few people have sent me the Illinois Chamber’s list of the Senate’s revenue-related proposals with questions of their own…
* Removal of the soda tax and is replaced by the Business Opportunity Tax Act. This tax is a tax imposed on businesses based on the number of Illinois employees of the business.
* Raises corporate income tax rate to 7% and personal income tax rate to 4.99%.
* Establishes the following service taxes; storage services, amusements, repair and maintenance services, landscaping services, and laundry and dry-cleaning services.
* Establish a tax on cable television services and direct broadcast satellite services.
* Decouples from the Domestic Production Activities Deduction.
* Eliminates the unitary business noncombination rule.
* Makes the research and development credit permanent.
* Redefines manufacturing to include graphic arts production and includes items formerly included in the manufacturers purchase credit in the manufacturing machinery and equipment exemption.
* Provides that False Claims Act cases may not be brought with respect to any taxes imposed, collected, or administered by the State of Illinois.
* Repeals the Adult Entertainment Tax effective January 1, 2018.
* Modifies pollution control facilities valuation under the Property Tax Code.
The Chicagoland Chamber made the same mistake as the Illinois Chamber by referring to the “Opportunity Tax” as a “head tax.” As we discussed yesterday, the tax isn’t based on the number of employees, but rather on the amount of a company’s annual payroll.
And while it’s true that the Adult Entertainment Tax (often referred to as the “pole tax” when it passed) is repealed, those strip clubs are now covered under the new service tax on “amusement” businesses. And the sexual violence programs funded under that previous tax will still receive funding from the service tax.
* Even after using the Google, I still don’t understand some of the other stuff in the bill, but it looks like business got some wins with its losses.
Any help out there?
By the way, the full legislation as most recently amended is here.
34 Comments
|
A straight uphill climb
Wednesday, Jan 25, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From the Illinois Policy Institute’s news service…
The Illinois Senate has begun the process to pass what leaders call a grand budget compromise, but is facing opposition from nearly all sides.
Senate President John Cullerton and Minority Leader Christine Radogno presented 13 bills that they hope will break the years-long budget stalemate. One of the proposed bills made changes to the workers’ compensation laws in the state. It drew opposition from both business organizations and workers rights groups alike. Radogno said the bill, like the others, is a middle-of-the-road approach.
“At the end of the day not everyone is going to love this,” Ragodno said.
That’s an understatement.
* But Radogno is completely determined to get this done…
“We have generally utilized the ideas that have come from our members, from the working groups, from stakeholders,” Radogno said during Tuesday’s committee meeting. “I think while we certainly would like to get something done, we are both very humble and willing to accept further additions, refinements and so on.”
“This is a huge package with many, many moving parts and I can’t stress enough how much we are interested in constructive feedback to make this thing work,” she added.
* And even Sen. Bill Brady, no fan of tax hikes, is pushing forward…
Meanwhile, the Illinois Chamber of Commerce, a close ally of Rauner, is opposing the entire package because of the way all the pieces are linked together, President Todd Maisch said.
While there are some positive aspects, Maisch said, “Our assessment is the package on the whole is very much a net negative for the business community.”
One concern for the Chamber of Commerce is the proposed business opportunity tax, which would range from $225 annually for businesses with Illinois payrolls of less than $100,000 to $15,000 for businesses with payrolls of $1.5 million or more.
State Sen. Bill Brady, R-Bloomington, said it’s important to continue having these discussions to arrive at an agreement that everyone can live with.
“This is still fluid,” Brady said. “It’s still our hope that … we will get to a point where the business community believes there’s more benefit than negative.”
* Sen. Nybo is another one to watch…
But the strike-fast-and-heavy approach has yet to materialize. Republicans balked at a quick vote to send a statement earlier this month; Tuesday, there were jitters on both sides. Hutchinson defended her measure, which drew 112 separate notices of interest-group opposition to the Revenue Committee, against criticism that it’s “rushed.” And Sen. Kwame Raoul (D-Chicago) whose support for cost-saving changes to the workers’ compensation system is crucial, complained about making difficult decisions while Rauner has lawmakers “under the gun.”
“It’s not so much that the administration has us under the gun as that we have no budget,” replied Sen. Chris Nybo (R-Elmhurst), the committee’s ranking Republican. “We owe more than we spend and businesses are leaving in droves. That’s the gun that I see were under.”
* Tribune…
Cullerton and others tried to paint the widespread opposition as a good thing, saying all sides must sacrifice to get a fair agreement.
“These individuals are special interests. They don’t have the obligation that we have of trying to pass a budget,” Cullerton said. “We’re not offended by that. It just proves that what we’re putting together is a true compromise.”
That argument fell flat for many lawmakers who worried about casting votes for major tax increases with no guarantee they would erase the state’s persistent money woes, saying changes designed to ease the pain by spurring job growth don’t go far enough.
Some pointed to a provision that tied the various proposals together. The idea being that if one piece of the puzzle failed, none of the bills could become law. But some have interpreted that to mean that even if they don’t vote for a tax increase, they would be cast as enablers should they choose to support other measures. Radogno said that line of thinking was “a huge stretch.”
Cullerton and Radogno are both right, of course. But heavy opposition from all sides is never easy to overcome. And while it is a huge stretch to tie members to all the bills with even a single vote for one of them, we’ve all seen much larger stretches used in campaigns.
* From a pal…
Anyone from either party expecting a ticker tape parade for voting to get us out of this mess needs to get their head out of their posterior. There will not be any celebrations with business leaders or union leaders. If that is their standard, there won’t be a deal.
Agreed.
20 Comments
|
* Sun-Times…
In an interview on WTTW-Chicago Tuesday night, Emanuel launched an attack on the governor for a two-year budget impasse, criticizing him as a man who has left the state “rudderless” due to a “rigid ideology and a rigid style.”
“He’s never proposed a balanced budget in two years. I think tomorrow morning when he gets up to speak at the State of the State, he owes the people of Illinois. Start, ‘I am sorry.’ Start with an apology,” Emanuel said.
Emanuel said the governor has “abdicated” his gubernatorial responsibilities and should be offering up solutions “not gum up the works with ideological things that are ancillary.”
“The State of Illinois is rudderless under Rauner,” Emanuel said.
* Politico…
“What I don’t support is what the governor has done. The state of Illinois is rudderless under Rauner. You’re the governor. If I went two weeks without a budget, would you be blaming Ald. Carrie Austin, the chair of the budget committee, or me?” […]
“The governor is treating the kids of Chicago as if they’re not part of the state. And he’s treating taxpayers as if they’re second class citizens,” Emanuel said. “What is he doing? Rather than making progress, he is standing in the way. I think he has taken these rigid ideological positions, a rigid style, and Springfield and now Illinois have ground to a halt because of the approach he’s had.”
Rauner’s office fired back in a statement.
“A partisan rant coming from Madigan’s mayor is unhelpful to progress in Springfield,” spokeswoman Catherine Kelly said in a statement. “Madigan’s mayor should focus less on alliteration and more on getting his murder capital city under control.”
“Murder capital city”? He does realize that Chicago is in Illinois, right? And criticizing alliteration in a statement full of the same is a bit odd.
* And then this happened…
* CNN thinks it has that one figured out…
Shortly after 8 p.m. on Tuesday night, Fox’s “O’Reilly Factor” ran a segment about violence in Chicago that included the following statistics: “228 shootings in 2017 (up 5.5% from last year” and “42 homicides in 2017 (up 24% from last year).”
One of the show’s guests, Horace Cooper, an adjunct fellow with the National Center for Public Policy Research, a conservative think tank, said, “I don’t know another word besides ‘carnage’ to describe the devastation that’s been taking place.”
Just over an hour later, at 9:25 p.m. ET, Trump took to Twitter using the same statistics Fox News had used and the same language as Cooper.
57 Comments
|
|
Comments Off
|
SOTS preview
Wednesday, Jan 25, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From the governor’s office…
In the State of the State, the Governor will say that he is optimistic about the future of Illinois and use the opportunity to talk about Illinois’ accomplishments, as well as the work that still lies ahead. He is optimistic because of recent bipartisan agreement that we need to make changes to the system with passing a truly balanced budget
Another element to that optimism comes from a look at what we’ve already accomplished, like ethics reform, record education funding, job creation and making government more efficient. He will also encourage the General Assembly to pass legislation allowing voters to weigh-in on fair maps and term limits. The Governor believes that by working together we can build on these changes and address the problems facing our state.
Additionally, he will be highlighting a family from Clinton as he discusses the Future Energy Jobs Bill in the speech.
Speech Excerpts:
“Clearly we’re excited about the achievements we’ve made and the opportunities left to seize. But we still face significant challenges.”
“Through bipartisan cooperation, Illinois can once again be the economic engine of the Midwest and the home of innovation and prosperity.”
“We – Republicans, Democrats, and everyone in between – have a moral obligation to work together to bring change. We, together, can return Illinois to a place of hope, opportunity, and prosperity.”
37 Comments
|
* So far, the Illinois Republican Party has sent me no press releases whacking individual House Dems, but I assume those are coming. From the ILGOP…
“By voting to enact Madigan’s Rules, House Democrats have relinquished all ability to act independently or put the people ahead of the political machine. Today House Democrats chose to put Mike Madigan first.” - Illinois Republican Party Spokesman Aaron DeGroot
Moments ago, House Democrats voted to relinquish all autonomy and independence to the Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives, Mike Madigan, by adopting Madigan’s own handcrafted rules that govern the Illinois House of Representatives.
Madigan’s Rules continue to give the Speaker an unprecedented amount of power over the legislative agenda of the Illinois House of Representatives, stifling the voice of all other 117 members, both Democrats and Republicans. These rules allow Speaker Madigan to determine what legislation lives and dies.
House Republicans, led by Leader Jim Durkin, proposed alternative rules that increase transparency and public participation in the legislative agenda and process of the House. The House Republican proposal was not given a public hearing. Highlights of the proposal were discussed in Capitol Fax.
Thanks so much for dragging me into this, ILGOP.
The roll call is here.
* Rep. Scott Drury, who voted against Madigan for Speaker, voted “No” on the rules today.
Rep. D’Amico is listed as a “No,” but he rose after the vote to say he accidentally hit the wrong switch. Reps. Mayfield and Soto have excused absences.
…Adding… I should also probably note that House Majority Leader Currie pointed out during today’s debate that all Senate Republicans voted for very similar rules in their own chamber just this month.
* From newly elected GOP Rep. Steven Reick…
Today in Springfield the House Democrats used their majority status to push through a set of egregious House Rules that stifle democracy and silence the voices of Republican lawmakers on important issues.
After a vigorous hour-long debate that was heated at times, rules that will govern the movement of legislation for the 100th General Assembly were approved in a 63-53 vote. All but two Democrats in attendance voted in favor of rules that increase House Speaker Mike Madigan’s power over the entire General Assembly.
State Representative Steve Reick (R-Woodstock), voted against the proposed rules. “I’ve heard stories about the heavy hand of Mike Madigan and how he manipulates the rules to increase his power, but today’s action showed a breathtaking example of overreach,” said Reick, a freshman lawmaker from McHenry County. “Good ideas that benefit real people will be buried because of Mike Madigan’s singular authority over what bills get heard and what pieces of legislation will die a slow death in his all-powerful Rules Committee.”
Reick continued, “Individual Democrat members have said publicly that the rules need to change, and today we had an opportunity to return representative democracy to the people by rejecting Speaker Madigan’s Rules. Unfortunately, at the end of the debate, much like they did with the House Speaker vote at Inauguration two weeks ago, House Democrats fell in line and did what they were told to do.”
Under the rules approved on Tuesday, Madigan will retain a 3/5 majority on his House Rules Committee. Consisting of his most loyal stalwarts, no bill will be assigned for a hearing before a substantive committee without a majority vote of the Rules Committee. “Speaker Madigan’s most loyal supporters serve as the gatekeepers of the Rules Committee and all legislation,” said Reick. “These loyalists determine which bills advance through the process and which ones never see the light of day.”
The element Reick said he found to be the most egregious is a stipulation that rulings of the Speaker related to the discharge of bills cannot be appealed or challenged. “Even if lawmakers follow the rules to the letter for the discharging of a bill, the Speaker can, and has on many occasions, ruled a motion to be ‘out of order’ and his ruling is final. This unrestricted power is a slap in the face of representative democracy and it undermines our ability as legislators to bring forward legislation that benefits our constituents.”
40 Comments
|
Question of the day
Tuesday, Jan 24, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* OK, let’s try this again since I misidentified the person in the previous question, which is now deleted. Been one of those days. Ugh. Sorry!!!
* The Question: How do you foresee the Senate’s “grand compromise” playing out in the next month or so?
28 Comments
|
* Things can change in a nanosecond on days like these, but a new service tax is expected to be unveiled before the Senate Revenue Committee meets today at 3 o’clock.
In recent days, I was told that the new tax would be somewhat limited and kinda like Wisconsin’s tax. Click here for that state’s list of taxable services. Candidate Bruce Rauner proposed a limited service tax back in the day.
I’m not sure what will be in the Illinois tax at this moment. But when/if it does surface, the amendment will likely be at this link.
No vote is scheduled on this and other tax hikes at that 3 o’clock hearing. As explained below, it’s gonna be testimony only.
* So, to recap, the sugary drinks tax is being removed from the package, the income tax will be set at 4.99 percent, a corporate tax exemption on certain dividend income that was targeted for repeal likely remains intact and a service tax could become part of the mix.
And it’s doubtful that we’ll see floor votes this week…
Republican Leader Christine Radogno said she’s unsure if a series of votes will come at all this week, citing concerns from lawmakers who are worried about the size and scope of the evolving package. The plan calls for everything from raising the income tax to overhauling how schools are funded.
“It’s gigantic, there’s a lot of moving parts, we are still amending it,” Radogno said Tuesday. “I, who have been living and breathing it for two months, am still having a hard time getting my head around certain pieces. So obviously, we want to respect people who have to cast a vote, that they are comfortable.”
* As always, keep track of everything by monitoring our live coverage post below.
*** UPDATE 1 *** The Senate bill could include what’s called an “opportunity tax.” It’s essentially a tax on employers based on their payroll. It’s supposedly a low tax that could raise big bucks because there are so many employers here. It has been estimated by one business group to raise $500 million a year and it’s sort of a “nod” to Speaker Madigan’s proposal to make all corporations pay a tax. ADDING: I’m now hearing this could raise $750 million a year at the level set in the legislation.
*** UPDATE 2 *** The amendment is now public. Click here. A quick reading shows a service tax on storage, amusements, repair and maintenance, landscaping, laundry and drycleaning,
*** UPDATE 3 *** And here’s that “opportunity tax” language…
(a) Beginning on July 1, 2017, a tax is hereby imposed upon each qualified business for the privilege of doing business in the State.
(b) The tax under subsection (a) shall be imposed in the following amounts:
(1) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is less than $100,000, then then annual tax is $225;
(2) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is $100,000 or more but less than $250,000, then the annual tax is $750;
(3) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is $250,000 or more but less than $500,000, then the annual tax is $3,750;
(4) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is $500,000 or more but less than $1,500,000, then the annual tax is $7,500; and
(5) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is $1,500,000 or more, then the annual tax is$15,000.
Apparently, there are about 100,000 businesses in Illinois with a payroll of less than $100,000.
And, yes, the personal income tax rate will indeed be set at 4.99 percent. The corporate rate will be set at 7 percent.
*** UPDATE 4 *** The proposal also repeals the franchise tax, which is a tax hated by the Illinois Policy Institute…
Illinois’ corporate franchise tax makes no sense. It is convoluted and economically harmful, and should be repealed. Even the term “franchise tax” is misleading and outdated, as it is not a tax on the franchise locations of a larger business, such as a chain of Burger Kings. Rather, it is a tax on entrepreneurs and investments in Illinois for the privilege of doing business here.
70 Comments
|
* From the Southern Illinoisan…
The Senate package, which also includes tax increases, gambling expansion, pension reforms and a host of other issues, would allocate an additional $1.1 billion in the current year for higher education. That includes money for universities, community colleges and grants to low-income students through the Monetary Award Program.
Combined with nearly $1 billion for higher education that was included in a stopgap spending deal approved in June, the Senate plan would restore university funding for this year to where it was in the 2014-15 school year. Schools currently aren’t receiving any state funds because the stopgap deal expired after Dec. 31.
* But drill down…
Under the Senate’s proposal, SIU would receive $93.4 million on top of the $106.2 million it received from the June stopgap spending plan. But the university, like others across the state, used the stopgap money to pay for expenses from the 2015-16 school year, during which it received only $57.5 million from an emergency funding measure approved in April.
In effect, Charles said, because the June stopgap money was used for last year’s expenses, the $93.4 million from the Senate plan would be SIU’s only state funding for the current year, compared with $199.6 million for the 2014-15 school year.
And the same goes for the other schools. They’re gonna wind up being about a billion short, I think. But they should go back to “normal” next fiscal year. If, that is, the governor and legislators can come to some sort of agreement.
21 Comments
|
* Subscribers know lots more about this topic…
The plan is to take testimony on the bills, then go to caucus late this afternoon. If the caucuses approve, then they’ll go back to committee for votes [the bills will be moved to the floor by the Senate Assignments Committee, which is unusual, but further amendments could be heard in committee]. If they don’t approve, then votes will be postponed until next month when the Senate returns. Again, subscribers know more about the why’s and the what’s.
As Monique says, floor votes tomorrow do, indeed, look iffy right now. Stay tuned and keep a close eye on our live coverage post below.
*** UPDATE *** Subscribers were told about this earlier today…
Again, keep an eye on our live coverage post below.
27 Comments
|
Today’s number: Up to 95,000 lost jobs
Tuesday, Jan 24, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* SJ-R…
The Illinois Health and Hospital Association has said block grants for Medicaid, combined with the loss of subsidized private insurance [via the ACA], could lead to a potential loss of $11.6 billion to $13.1 billion in annual “economic activity” in Illinois. The IHA says that translates to a potential loss of 84,000 to 95,000 jobs.
The hospital association is an interest group, so take its job numbers with a grain of salt.
But, man, even if those lost jobs are half that number. Whoa.
16 Comments
|
Rauner announces changes to pharmacy oversight
Tuesday, Jan 24, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Our old buddy Ray Long at the Trib…
Responding to a Tribune investigation that found drugstores frequently failed to warn customers about potentially dangerous drug interactions, Gov. Bruce Rauner is unveiling a major plan designed to improve public safety at pharmacies throughout the state.
The administration’s proposal would require pharmacists to counsel patients about risky drug combinations and other significant issues when buying a medication for the first time or when a prescription changes. Illinois law now requires only that patients be offered counseling, a mandate often addressed at the cash register with a brief inquiry, such as: “Any questions for the pharmacist today?”
The governor also plans to beef up state oversight, including directing inspectors to put more emphasis on adverse drug reactions and launching a “mystery shopper” program to test how well pharmacists comply with the law. […]
A Walgreens spokesman said: “Our goal is to provide the highest level of care to patients, and we are supportive of the governor’s effort to further promote a culture of safety in community pharmacies.”
Rauner’s plans to use existing inspectors and new mystery shoppers to improve safety at Illinois pharmacies can be achieved through executive orders. But changing the counseling requirement would need the approval of a bipartisan House-Senate panel, as would his proposal to post signs in pharmacies with a consumer hotline along with information about a patient’s right to counseling.
I still don’t understand why these big pharmacy chains don’t have computer programs that can automatically cross-check a customer’s prescriptions for potential harmful interactions. Why are we relying on human memory here? Humans can make mistakes because they get too busy (on orders from on high) or whatever.
…Adding… The proposed additions are underlined along with stricken text…
Failing to provide ensure that patient counseling in accordance with this Part, failing to respond to requests for patient counseling, attempting to circumvent patient counseling requirements, or otherwise discouraging patients from receiving patient counseling concerning their prescription medications is offered or refusing to respond to requests for patient counseling. […]
c) Every licensed pharmacy directly serving patients at a physical location must conspicuously post a sign provided by the Division containing a statement that the patient has the right to counseling, the Division’s consumer hotline number, information on how to file a complaint for failure to counsel, and any other information the Division deems appropriate. The sign must be printed in color ink or displayed electronically in color, measure at least 8 1⁄2 x 11 inches in size, and be posted at either a cashier counter or waiting area clearly visible to patients. Licensed pharmacies that do not maintain a physical location directly serving patients must include a copy of the sign within any dispensed prescriptions. The sign will be available to download on the Division’s website. […]
Nothing in this Section shall be construed as requiring a pharmacist to provide counseling when a patient or patient’s agent refuses such counseling. When a patient or patient’s agent refuses to accept patient counseling as provided in this Section, that refusal shall be documented. The absence of any record of a refusal to accept the offer to counsel shall be presumed to signify that the offer was accepted and that counseling was provided.
34 Comments
|
This didn’t have to happen
Tuesday, Jan 24, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From way back in late May of 2015…
Mayor Rahm Emanuel said Wednesday he wants to see how the frenzied final days of the Illinois General Assembly’s spring session play out before asking the new City Council to begin the search for new revenue to solve the $30 billion pension crisis that has dropped Chicago’s bond rating to junk status.
“We’re in active discussions on a casino as a funding source to shore up” police and fire pensions, the mayor told reporters after a City Council meeting. […]
Emanuel said he remains hopeful on what he once described as a “mega, mega-deal” that may include a sales tax on services, partial restoration of the expired increase in the state income tax, a Chicago casino and pension relief for police and fire and Chicago teachers.
“We’re now in the final two weeks before the end of the session. And as you know, this is usually the time — not just in Springfield, but with legislative bodies [everywhere] — when days are weeks and weeks are like months,” he said.
“There will be a lot of activity. I’m gonna be out there pressing the issues that are related to Chicago and its future [to make certain] Springfield does not make decisions at the expense of Chicago because there’s not a healthy Illinois without a healthy Chicago,” Emanuel said.
And since then? Almost nothing but destruction. And now we have a Senate plan that looks a whole lot like what was floating around a couple of years ago.
It all seems so pointless.
* From today’s NY Times…
At a meeting with the leaders of several construction and building trade unions, President Trump reiterated on Monday his interest in directing hundreds of billions of dollars to infrastructure investments, some of it from the federal government, union officials said.
“That was the impression I was taken away with,” said Sean McGarvey, the president of North America’s Building Trades Unions, an umbrella group, on a call with reporters after the meeting. “That the American citizenry and the American Treasury will be invested in building public infrastructure.” […]
Mr. McGarvey and Terry O’Sullivan, the general president of the Laborers’ International Union of North America, stressed to reporters their satisfaction at meeting with the president so soon after the inauguration. They said they went the entire Obama administration without being invited to a similar meeting. […]
At the meeting, Mr. McGarvey raised one point of possible discord between the labor leaders and the Trump administration: the so-called Davis-Bacon Act, which requires the federal government to pay contractors and subcontractors “locally prevailing wages,” as determined by the Labor Department, on most construction or renovation projects.
Many conservatives contend that the act inflates the cost of infrastructure projects, and on Tuesday, Senator Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, is proposing a bill to suspend it for federal highway construction contracts.
President Trump was apparently non-committal about the proposed GOP changes.
But just imagine how much things could’ve been different in Illinois if our Republican governor had reached out to the building trades right away like Trump just did.
* From Illinois Public Radio…
The [Senate’s proposal] shows there are many areas in which Democrats and Republicans can come to an agreement. But it still leaves one big philosophical question unanswered.
That question is whether a governor can say: “Pass my agenda, and only then will I negotiate on a budget.” […]
“It’s a very dangerous precedent to set,” [Sen. Kwame Raoul] says. “You don’t know who’s going to be elected governor in the future, and if we start to do these types of thing now, every governor is going to want to do that.”
One can imagine a future governor holding out on the budget in exchange something she wants around guns or abortion or some other contentious issue.
And here we are.
110 Comments
|
* Finke…
The Illinois Senate’s “grand bargain” package of bills will be revised to create a balanced budget, Senate President John Cullerton and Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno said Monday.
During a meeting with The State Journal-Register editorial board, Cullerton, D-Chicago, said he will show Senate Democrats a draft for the state to have a balanced budget by June 30, 2018. […]
Cullerton said he believes the analysis produced by Rauner’s budget office contained some flawed assumptions, and that lawmakers will be able to work throughout the spring on a balanced spending plan for next year that will be based on additional revenue. […]
Cullerton warned that the state could be facing another credit downgrade if it doesn’t take action this month to show it is dealing with the budget crisis.
Subscribers know more about those claimed “flawed assumptions” by GOMB.
* More on the possible credit downgrade from Pierog and McKinney…
Fitch has warned that inaction on the budget front would result in a downgrade by the end of this month.
“If they do not do something that comprehensively addresses their budget problem and their long-term accumulated budgetary liabilities, then we certainly would take action,” Fitch analyst Karen Krop said Monday.
21 Comments
|
New House rules proposed by Leader Durkin
Tuesday, Jan 24, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Yesterday, a commenter wondered why the House Republicans didn’t propose an alternative to Speaker Madigan’s proposed rules, which have been sharply criticized by the GOP and the Illinois Policy Institute as autocratic.
Well, House Republican Leader Jim Durkin filed a rules proposal yesterday. You can click here to read through it. I asked the HGOP early this morning for quick highlights of some of their proposed changes…
1. Creates specific requirements for advance notice of Rules Committee hearings, including identification of the measures to be considered:
One-hour notice for floor amendments & concurrence motions
72-hours notice to consider referral of bills to committee
24-hours notice for any other purpose
Currently, the Rules Committee often meets without providing any public notice; and it does not identify the legislative measures to be considered at the hearing.
Also requires a 2/3 vote for the Rules Committee to bypass standing/special committee consideration and advance floor amendments and concurrence motions to full House. In other words, such a motion to expedite business would require support from both the majority and minority party members of the committee.
2. Creates a public review period before action on committee amendments by requiring at least two-hours advance notice for an amendment to be considered in a committee.
Currently, committee amendments must be filed with the Clerk by 3 p.m. on the preceding day, but there is no requirement to provide public notice that such amendment may be considered at hearing of a particular committee.
3. Extends the Public Review Period for Floor Amendments (currently 1 hour) - Creates a longer public review period before committee consideration of floor amendments and concurrence motions by requiring that advance notice of a public hearing be given no later than the calendar day before the date of the hearing.
With the current one-hour notice requirement, a floor amendment can be filed, posted for a hearing, and adopted to the bill, and the bill passed by the House, all on the same day.
4. Restores a requirement in the House Rules that each bill be referred to a standing or special committee during the first year of a G.A. In 2013, the Democrat majority removed this decades-old requirement, thereby allowing the Rules Committee to kill a bill by preventing its consideration in a standing or special committee.
5. Second reading of bills during perfunctory session would be prohibited. In order to expedite the consideration of bills when the full House is not in session, the Clerk is often instructed to read bills a second time during the perfunctory session. This practice sometimes allows a bill to be approved by committee and then read by the Clerk on the same day, thereby allowing final passage on the following day.
Your thoughts?
16 Comments
|
|
Comments Off
|
It’s just a (gun) bill
Monday, Jan 23, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* HB 492’s synopsis…
Repeals the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act. Amends various Acts to make conforming changes. Effective immediately.
There are no co-sponsors on this bill which has about zero chance of passage, but, wow is there ever a press release…
STATEMENT FROM TANJA MURRAY, VOLUNTEER CHAPTER LEADER WITH THE ILLINOIS CHAPTER OF MOMS DEMAND ACTION FOR GUN SENSE IN AMERICA:
“It’s baffling and shameful that some of our representatives apparently want to get rid of a common-sense law that makes it harder for dangerous people to get guns. At a time when our state’s largest city is reeling from a gun violence crisis – a crisis made worse by guns brought in from states without background check requirements – this proposal would only make it easier for criminals to get guns right here in Illinois.
To reduce the gun violence affecting communities across Illinois and across the country, we need more states, not fewer, to require background checks for all gun sales. I urge our representatives to reject this proposal and make clear that Illinois will not let the gun lobby roll back lifesaving gun laws.”
“Some” would be “one,” at least, so far.
But, hey, ever vigilant. I get it.
* And speaking of gun bills, this is from the NRA…
On Wednesday, January 25, the Senate Criminal Law Committee is scheduled to consider Senate Bill 50. Sponsored by state Senator William Haine, Senate Bill 50 continues the fight for important pro-gun safety reform for hearing protection rights. NRA Members and Second Amendment supporters are encouraged to sign a witness slip to go on record in support of Senate Bill 50. Please also contact your state Senator immediately and urge them to support SB 50.
Suppressors provide numerous benefits to the hunters and sportsmen who choose to use them. Most importantly, suppressors can decrease muzzle report to hearing-safe levels and reduce shooters’ risk of hearing damage, which can occur when discharging a firearm without proper hearing protection. Additionally, suppressors help increase accuracy by reducing felt recoil and shot “flinch.” Beginners to shooting sports adhere to a quicker learning curve on average because the muffled sound equates to increased focus and concentration on proper shooting mechanics. Furthermore, suppressors help reduce noise complaints from neighbors, which are frequently used as an excuse to close hunting lands throughout the country
* Synopsis…
Amends the Illinois Police Training Act. Provides the annual training of police chiefs must include at least one course on the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act, the Firearm Concealed Carry Act, and firearms investigations. Amends the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act. Permits the State Police to notify the FBI if a person on the Terrorist Watchlist applies for a FOID card. Requires the State Police to provide notice and reason for the disqualification of a firearm purchase or a FOID card revocation to all law enforcement agencies with jurisdiction to assist with the seizure of the person’s FOID card. Adds as grounds to deny an application for or to revoke or seize the person’s FOID card that the person is charged with making a terrorist threat or soliciting or providing material support for terrorism. Makes other changes. Amends the Firearm Concealed Carry Act. Provides that a person may not carry a concealed handgun equipped with a silencer. Amends the Wildlife Code. Removes the prohibition on using a silencer to mute the sound resulting from firing a gun. Amends the Criminal Code of 2012. Provides that the offense of unlawful use of weapons includes knowingly: using, or possessing with the intent to use, a silencer on a handgun, except at a shooting range; or possessing any silencer for firearms, other than handguns, not in compliance with the National Firearms Act. Provides that the offense of unlawful sale or delivery of firearms includes knowingly transferring a silencer to a person not authorized to possess the silencer under federal law. Effective immediately.
41 Comments
|
How will the strike authorization vote work?
Monday, Jan 23, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* In anticipation of the strike authorization vote starting January 30th, I asked AFSCME’s Anders Lindall a couple of quick questions about what to expect. Here are my questions with his answers…
* What are your strike vote authorization rules?
* Do you need a percentage of members voting (ie a majority of those who show up to a meeting to vote) or a total percentage of all membership? And is it 50 percent plus one to authorize?”
A vote of more than 50 percent of those voting would grant the bargaining committee the authorization to call a strike if necessary.
But as we have repeatedly made clear, a vote to authorize a strike would not necessarily mean there will be a strike. The committee will continue to do everything in its power to bring the governor back to the bargaining table in good faith, and to avoid a strike.
A bit more here. For instance…
The Strike Authorization Vote will take place in each local union between January 30 and February 19
Thoughts?
54 Comments
|
* The New York Times reports on various gubernatorial reactions to a reported Trump administration plan to block-grant the Medicaid program…
Governors like the idea of having more control over Medicaid, but fear that block grants may be used as a vehicle for federal budget cuts.
“We are very concerned that a shift to block grants or per capita caps for Medicaid would remove flexibility from states as the result of reduced federal funding,” Gov. Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, a Republican, said this month in a letter to congressional leaders. “States would most likely make decisions based mainly on fiscal reasons rather than the health care needs of vulnerable populations.”
Gov. Robert Bentley of Alabama, a Republican, said that if a block grant reduced federal funds for the program, “states should be given the ability to reduce Medicaid benefits or enrollment, to impose premiums” or other cost-sharing requirements on beneficiaries, and to reduce Medicaid spending in other ways.
In Louisiana, Gov. John Bel Edwards, a Democrat, said he was troubled by the prospect of a block grant with deep cuts in federal funds. “Under such a scenario,” he said, “flexibility would really mean flexibility to cut critical services for our most vulnerable populations, including poor children, people with disabilities and seniors in need of nursing home and home-based care.”
Gov. John W. Hickenlooper of Colorado, a Democrat, said that block grant proposals could shift costs to states and “force us to make impossible choices in our Medicaid program.”
If history is any guide, block-granting will lead to less federal money being spent.
* The issue is also mentioned briefly - and rather coldly - in a letter sent by our acting Director of Insurance to Republican congressional leaders. Click the pic for a larger image and the complete letter…
Discuss.
22 Comments
|
* From the ILGOP…
Will House Democrats Bow to Mike Madigan Again This Week?
Decision to Enact Madigan’s Rules Expected This Week; Would Give Madigan “Total Control”
“House Democrats voted less than two weeks ago to give Mike Madigan an unprecedented 17th term as Speaker. This week House Democrats must decide whether they will give Madigan even more power by adopting Madigan’s Rules, which would give him total control of the legislative agenda of the General Assembly.” - Illinois Republican Party Spokesman Aaron DeGroot
Background:
After the inauguration of a new General Assembly every two years, members of the Illinois House of Representatives adopt the little-known rules package that governs how their legislative body hears, debates, and votes on pending legislation.
For decades, House Speaker Mike Madigan has used the Rules of the House of Representatives to control the legislative agenda of the General Assembly according to his personal whims and political strategy. Speaker Madigan rules the Illinois House of Representatives and determines what legislation lives and dies.
“The way our House rules operate, I think they are more restrictive than any other legislature in the country and create a lot of control in the speaker.” – State Rep. Elaine Nekritz, October 2013
The House based its rules on the Senate’s rules back when the Republicans had control of both chambers. The Senate’s rules are still pretty close to the House’s rules, yet nary a peep about that chamber.
But, then they couldn’t tweet stuff like this…
* Even so, I’ve been railing against these rules since Pate Philip first unveiled them. They’re undemocratic and they should be changed.
Committee chairmen and minority spokespersons should be elected by their caucuses, not appointed by the leaders. Committee staff should report to and be hired by chairmen/spokesmen and not the leaders.
I’d hesitate to bring back floor amendments, which long ago could be filed on bills without first having to clear the Rules Committee as long as they were related to the underlying subject matter. Back in the old days, Madigan would simply refuse to move any legislation at all to the floor that could be amended with hostile language to his favored constituencies (like trial lawyers). And the House Republicans tried one year to essentially shut down the chamber’s operations by filing a couple of hundred floor amendments to a bunch of bills on the floor. The old rules required taking action on all those amendments before the underlying bills could be advanced.
Also back in the day, the House Rules Committee only really met to enforce a chamber rule that limited legislation in even-numbered years to appropriations bills and “emergency” (I think that was the term) legislation. The Rules Committee decided what could be considered an emergency under the rules during election years (a very handy power). Now, Rules controls everything all the time. It should be reined in.
* Anyway, that’s a few points for starters. Y’all have any other ideas?
27 Comments
|
Question of the day
Monday, Jan 23, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* This group is was [he resigned from the board last year] backed by Democratic gubernatorial hopeful Chris Kennedy…
* The Question: Effective or not? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
survey hosting
77 Comments
|
Unsolicited advice
Monday, Jan 23, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* My Crain’s Chicago Business column…
[The Senate’s grand bargain] plan isn’t perfect, but no compromise ever is. The governor’s budget office says their plan isn’t balanced, so more work definitely needs to be done.
In public, the governor has been doing his best not to derail the Senate’s proposal, but nobody really knows what he’s doing behind the scenes. Madigan hasn’t said much of anything, but nobody expects him to just accept something from the Senate and gleefully put it on Rauner’s desk.
To my mind, the key to getting something done right now is in the hands of House Republicans. They were, after all, the caucus that asked the governor’s budget office to analyze the Senate’s appropriations plan. Rauner’s budget folks projected a $2.3 billion deficit for next fiscal year.
Did Rauner or his people “suggest” this request? My guess is yes, but House Republicans need to make darned sure that Rauner doesn’t somehow kill this thing off. Work with—and not for—the governor to help figure out how to fix and pass the Senate’s plan.
An agreement would mean Madigan will be outnumbered and surrounded—the position he has worked so hard to avoid for two solid years. Right now, he can credibly point to Rauner’s intransigence while the Republicans point at him, and he can do this for as long as he wants.
But an agreement means that Madigan will either have to finally lay all his own cards on the table or take all the heat for the ongoing destruction.
Don’t screw this up. We simply can’t go through another two years of this.
Click here to read the rest.
15 Comments
|
Chairman’s association announces straw poll
Monday, Jan 23, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I told subscribers a bit about this poll earlier today…
The Illinois Democratic County Chairman’s Association announced that from Monday January 23rd to midnight on Sunday January 29th, it will conduct an online straw poll of its members and Democrats who join the organization via online submission to measure their preference for whom Democrats in Illinois should nominate for Governor.
The straw poll results, once tabulated, will be released to the public the following day on IDCCA’s website and social media channels. The straw poll will run from 10:30am on Monday January 23rd until midnight on January 29th.
“After two years of disastrous management under Governor Rauner and with the impending presidency of Donald Trump, Democrats must offer a positive vision to voters and draw their attention to the numerous well-qualified and exciting candidates who can lead Illinois into a better future,” said IDCCA President and Chairman of the Rock Island County Democrats Doug House.
The straw poll will be the first of its kind in Illinois to express the preference of activists, elected party leaders, and volunteers in all of Illinois’ 102 counties. IDCCA intends to conduct several more polls to continue drawing attention to the Democratic primary race for Governor.
The candidates included in the first straw poll are (in alphabetical order):
• State Senator Daniel Biss
• Congresswoman Cheri Bustos
• Congresswoman Robin Kelly
• Chris Kennedy
• State Senator Andy Manar
• Alderman Ameya Pawar
• J.B. Pritzker
• State Senator Kwame Raoul
• City Treasurer Kurt Summers
“Since November, there has been tremendous energy and desire among the people to find a way to fight back. IDCCA and its members across Illinois are prepared to play a leadership role in harnessing this enthusiasm and preparing it for our eventual nominee,” said House.
The straw poll voting will occur via the web at:
http://survey.constantcontact.com/survey/a07edqhemzkiy8ustps/start [Fixed link - again]
The straw poll will be monitored by staff to prevent duplicate or fraudulent voting. Submission of an identifiable and valid email address and an Illinois zip code are the only requirements for membership in IDCCA and for the vote to be counted. This straw poll is not scientific and should not be construed as an accurate measurement of public opinion among Democratic primary voters.
If you vote, let us know which way you went and why.
…Adding… The link has now been fixed. Click here. [I had to fix the link again. Sorry about that! The second time was on me. Oops!]
45 Comments
|
* The Illinois Policy Institute continues to focus on Senate Republicans in order to kill off the chamber’s “grand bargain.” Here’s its latest…
Americans for Tax Reform, a taxpayer advocacy group, maintains an active pledge for lawmakers across the country to sign. The pledge states that the signer will agree to not vote for or support any new taxes or tax hikes. The pledge has proved popular among candidates and officeholders across federal, state and local levels of government with signatures from over 1,400 elected officials.
The following Illinois state senators have also signed the pledge:
Tim Bivins, R-Dixon
Kyle McCarter, R-Lebanon
Jim Oberweis, R-Sugar Grove
Dave Syverson, R-Rockford
Bill Brady, R-Bloomington
Sue Rezin, R-Morris
The state senators who signed this pledge should remember they were not making a promise to Americans for Tax Reform, but rather to Illinois taxpayers. Illinois already has one of the largest combined tax burdens in the country, and the last thing middle-and working-class Illinoisans need at this point is yet another tax hike.
Meh.
It was a campaign pledge, and campaign pledges should be broken when the very future of the state is at issue.
And, really, the only pledge that matters now is the pledge that all lawmakers make when they’re sworn in: To uphold the state Constitution. And that Constitution requires a balanced budget.
So, unless these geniuses can come up with a plan to close a $6 billion budget hole without raising any taxes whatsoever, that pledge to Grover Norquist means nothing.
* Meanwhile, here’s its latest Facebook ad, which appears to be targeting Leader Radogno’s own district…
* And this is from its “news service”…
Parts of a potential budget agreement in Springfield include a number of pro-business incentives, but business advocates say they’re no consolation for massive tax hikes.
A series of bills waiting to be voted on in the Illinois Senate are being promoted by leadership as the grand compromise that will break Illinois’ two-year long budget stalemate between Gov. Bruce Rauner and the Democrat-controlled General Assembly. The proposed plan rakes in billions by raising the state’s income tax to almost five percent along with other taxes. They also included a two-year property tax freeze and minor reforms to pensions and workers compensation laws in an effort to court business support.
But Technology and Manufacturers Association of Illinois President and former state Sen. Steve Rauschenberger says token reforms are no justification for a massive tax increase. “An increase in revenue is not a good deal for minor changes to the workers’ compensation program,” he said.
*** UPDATE *** Hilarious…
This is exactly why I consider that group to be more of a propaganda outlet than a “think tank.”
44 Comments
|
* Tribune editorial board…
In a perhaps unprecedented move, Senate President John Cullerton and Republican Leader Christine Radogno will present to their members a proposal that’s like a Jenga game — remove one cube and the whole thing collapses. […]
Without analyzing each Jenga cube, we’re on board with the idea of nudging the fragile tower forward. We agree with Radogno’s description of this proposal — at this point in Springfield, it’s this something vs. everyone else’s nothing. Waiting for a more critical development, a more perfect policy package, a less painful strategy, hotter pressure from bond markets or constituents, would only continue the status quo.
Is a “do something” strategy the ideal way to proceed? Not even close. There are 100 reasons senators could collapse the Jenga tower. Perhaps most difficult to swallow will be the proposed tax hikes, which include an increase in the personal income tax from 3.75 to roughly 5 percent, along with a new state tax on sweetened beverages. Those proposals could change; the tax hike bill, along with many of the others, is not the final product. […]
But we agree with Radogno that at this point, given this sorry state, what she and Cullerton are doing is something vs. nothing. If passed in the Senate, it will put pressure on Madigan’s House and on Gov. Bruce Rauner to react.
The most interesting part of that editorial was in its description of our current environment as the “status quo.” The Trib has formerly relegated that phrase to the decades before Gov. Rauner was elected. So, is that an admission that we’re now in a whole other realm? We’ll see.
The editorial also concluded with the admonition that it was waiting to see all the bills before issuing its final opinion. So, things could change.
* The Daily Herald’s editorial board issued a very similar opinion…
As to the grand deal itself, we can say this: We appreciate the political courage Cullerton and Radogno are displaying in putting the state’s interests above their own, risking the political fallout from special interests and partisans.
We are not ready, at least not yet, to sign onto the entire proposed 13-point proposal that would include a significant increase in the state income tax and an expansion of legalized gambling. We do, however, agree without reservation with many aspects of the plan — a property tax freeze, the leadership term limits, workers’ compensation reform.
And it is clear that Illinois is not going to solve its significant problems and rebuild its reputation, is not going to stop the exodus of families and businesses fleeing the state, unless our two parties work seriously together in a spirit of cooperation and compromise.
No matter anyone’s positions on the proposed grand deal, the two Senate leaders deserve everyone’s thanks for their willingness to put themselves on the line.
* But the Northwest Herald is having nothing of it…
We’ve got to hand it to Senate leaders; they don’t discriminate. Their proposal is equally bad for middle class wage earners and business owners.
“The Senate budget proposal is an absolute disaster,” Rep. David McSweeney, R-Barrington Hills, said. “Raising the income tax rate by 32 percent, or even up to 40 percent, would crush taxpayers.
“We need to cut spending, not raises taxes. This would be the final nail in the coffin of the state of Illinois. … We lost 115,000 people [to outmigration] last year. This will drive even more people out of the state. …”
We urge state senators, including Sen. Pam Althoff, R-McHenry, and Sen. Karen McConnaughay, R-St. Charles, to reject this plan.
* And the Sun-Times doesn’t want radical changes in the workers’ compensation insurance component…
One way to cut costs without further reducing worker benefits would be to give the Illinois Department of Insurance the authority to ensure workers’ comp insurance companies aren’t getting excessive profits. That’s a safeguard that already exists in many other states.
Setting workers’ comp benefits at a reasonable level can help Illinois’ economic competitiveness. But Illinois shouldn’t expect to have lower workers’ comp costs than its neighbors. Part of the formula for calculating workers’ comp premiums is the total amount of employer payrolls. Because Illinois has higher average incomes than adjoining states, it can’t expect its workers’ comp rates to be lower.
Cullerton and Radogno are pushing for a bipartisan solution to a political impasse that has forced Illinois to stagger along without an annual budget for more than a year and a half. We support that effort. We also trust they can get the job done while preserving a fair workers’ comp system.
* Related…
* Phil Kadner: Small ray of hope for fairer school funding in Illinois
24 Comments
|
Blair Hull back in the news
Monday, Jan 23, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Tribune…
State Rep. Scott Drury, the lone House Democrat that didn’t vote for House Speaker Michael Madigan earlier this month, reported a $2,000 contribution from Blair Hull, a businessman and 2004 primary candidate for U.S. Senate.
Not mentioned is that Hull was a top backer of Speaker Madigan’s Democratic primary opponent last year. So, the contribution to Drury makes more sense in that context.
12 Comments
|
Dem candidates start to staff up
Monday, Jan 23, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Korecki…
As J.B. Pritzker explores a 2018 bid for governor, he has tapped an array of advisers that includes influential Democratic donor Michael Sacks, POLITICO has learned.
Sacks, GCM Grosvenor CEO and a top personal adviser to Mayor Rahm Emanuel, called Pritzker “extraordinary” and offered his backing should Pritzker ultimately file campaign papers.
Sacks was the lead donor to the anti-Gov. Bruce Rauner political action committee, LIFT — Leading Illinois for Tomorrow — in last November’s legislative battles, and has long financially backed Emanuel’s campaigns and funded Democratic efforts in Illinois and elsewhere. […]
Among others with whom Pritzker is conferring on an unofficial basis: state Sen. Heather Steans, who chairs the Senate appropriations committee and Matt Hynes, former chief lobbyist to the city of Chicago under Emanuel, said Becky Carroll, who is handling Pritzker’s communications for this phase.
Steans was once considered a possible gubernatorial candidate and is closely allied to Senate President John Cullerton.
Anyway, that’s a lot of Rahm folks.
* One person not mentioned in the piece is Nikki Budzinski, who was the UFCW’s political director before running labor outreach for Hillary Clinton’s campaign. She’s from Illinois and was recently hired by Pritzker to handle things. From her Twitter feed this past weekend…
* Back to Korecki…
On Saturday, [Chris Kennedy] took part in the Women’s March in Chicago.
“He marched with his wife and kids and other relatives in Chicago,” said Hanah Jubeh, a senior adviser to Kennedy.
Hanah Jubeh is also an advisor to Sen. Kwame Raoul, who describes Kennedy as an old friend. The two men attended the Operation PUSH breakfast on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day last week. Sen. Raoul has long been listed as a possible gubernatorial contender, but Kennedy’s Jubeh hire makes me think he may be aiming for something else.
* Related…
* Sneed exclusive: Pritzker goes on gubernatorial ‘listening tour’
25 Comments
|
Ambition isn’t always blind
Monday, Jan 23, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* My weekly syndicated newspaper column…
On a fairly regular basis back in the day, state Sen. Barack Obama would walk up to the Senate press box and bum cigarettes off me. That was when people could smoke in the Senate chambers and back when both of us smoked. Now, we both chew nicotine gum and smoking on the Senate floor is strictly forbidden.
Obama was mainly an OPC smoker, meaning “other peoples’ cigarettes.” I’d usually give him a little grief about how maybe he should buy his own pack once in a while, but I never denied his request unless I was almost out. He’d always take the cigarette to a room in the back of the chamber, never seeming to smoke at his desk like others did.
One day as I was wandering through the Statehouse near his office, Obama hollered out my name and asked me to come in and join him. I presumed he wanted to bum yet another cigarette and I was right. I tossed my pack on his desk and he took one out, lit it and we made a little small talk.
Honestly, I didn’t much care for the guy in those days. He hadn’t yet done a lot of real work, or built strong relationships with fellow legislators by then, particularly with members of the Senate Black Caucus. And by the time of our little chat he’d gotten way ahead of himself by challenging Congressman Bobby Rush in the 2000 Democratic primary and losing badly.
I was interviewed by the Chicago Reader newspaper during that campaign. I told the reporter that Sen. Obama was “a very intelligent man” who has “some really good ideas,” and would “probably make a pretty good congressman.” But I also pointed out that he hadn’t had a lot of success in Springfield and speculated that it could be “because he places himself above everybody. He likes people to know he went to Harvard.”
I got a phone call from Obama after that story was published. He was stung by my comments. I tried to point out the positive things I said, but that didn’t work. At the end of our conversation, we agreed to start talking more often, which may have been why he called me into his office that day.
We had finished our cigarettes and I remember getting up to leave. It’s not like he knew any hot inside information that I could use in my Capitol Fax publication, so I had work to do and needed to move on. But Obama asked me to stay a while longer, so I sat back down and we each lit another smoke.
Obama then stunned me by asking a question that I never in a million years would’ve anticipated: What would I think of him running for U.S. Senate in 2004?
His question seemed so . . . presumptuous. Rush had just cleaned his clock by a 30-point margin, I reminded Obama. If he ran for statewide office and lost, he’d be finished, washed up, out of the game for good. “There is still some honor to serving in the Illinois Senate,” I gently scolded him.
But Obama said he was getting heat from the home front. His Springfield duties were preventing him from making a decent living as an attorney, so he either had to move up to a much higher office or get out of politics and go make some real money.
I couldn’t argue with that logic, but I suggested that maybe he stop using “Barack” and call himself “Barry” or something. He said that’s what his friends called him when he was growing up, but said he wanted to stick to his given name. I made some sort of joke about Irishing up his last name with an apostrophe after the “O” and using green yard signs. Had I known at the time that his middle name was “Hussein,” I’m sure I would’ve made some sort of inappropriate joke.
I tell this story whenever somebody asks me for advice about whether to run for higher office in order to explain why I no longer provide that sort of counsel. I mean, I actually told a future President of the United States to not be so darned ambitious. It was not my proudest moment.
Nowadays, I just say, “What do you really want to do?” And if they can answer that question, I urge them to put their entire heart and soul into the effort.
It works out much better that way—for them and for me.
* Related…
* Bernie Schoenburg: Obama’s legacy ‘forever tied’ to Springfield
* Christi Parsons: I reported on Obama longer than anyone else. Here’s what I learned.
21 Comments
|
|
Comments Off
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
   
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|
