Poll: Rauner up by 3, Durbin up by 14
Monday, Apr 14, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From Illinois Review…
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Illinois Voters shows Republican businessman Bruce Rauner picking up 43% of the vote to Quinn’s 40%. Six percent (6%) prefer some other candidate in the race, while 10% are undecided.
The latest Rasmussen statewide poll finds Durbin picking up 51% of the vote to State Senator Jim Oberweis’ 37%. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate in the race, while 10% are undecided.
More here and here.
54 Comments
|
* The Rauner campaign threw down the gauntlet today…
Republican candidate Bruce Rauner said today that if he were governor, he would veto legislation lawmakers sent to Gov. Pat Quinn last week that would cut pension benefits for some city workers and allow aldermen to raise property taxes to shore up the retirement program.
A spokesman for Rauner said the Winnetka businessman believes the measure should include shifting workers to a 401(k)-style defined contribution plan and contends that “raising property taxes is not the way to go.”
“Unless Pat Quinn wants to raise property taxes, he should veto the legislation,” said Rauner spokesman Mike Schrimpf.
* Greg Hinz…
But it looks to me like Mr. Rauner may have put himself on the griddle, too, because so far, other than a few bromides about cutting “waste,” he’s given absolutely no clue how he’d make up for tens of billions of dollars in unfunded liability in city and state pension funds. And it certainly belies any notion that Mr. Emanuel secretly backs Mr. Rauner for governor.
Today’s developments came when Mr. Quinn scheduled a news conference to talk about a plan to help lower-middle-class families buy their first homes, and the Rauner campaign sent out an advance statement accusing the Democratic incumbent of hypocrisy for not promising to veto the Emanuel bill.
“As Pat Quinn tours the state relaunching a ‘new’ home loan program, will he break his promises again and allow Chicago property taxes to rise?” the statement asked. “Will he or won’t he? Quinn won’t say if he will sign the property-tax bill.” […]
[Rauner’s] pressure on Mr. Quinn to veto the bill ought to erase any lingering notion in some political circles that Mr. Emanuel quietly backs Mr. Rauner for governor. Ain’t so. Moves like today’s by Mr. Rauner have the potential to rev up City Hall and Chicago Democrats to put aside any disagreements with Mr. Quinn and rally city voters for the Democratic incumbent.
But, keep in mind, Rauner is trying to up the GOP’s vote total in Chicago, and this ain’t a bad way to do it.
* Quinn said he was “studying” the pension bill, but also attacked Rauner…
Quinn also used the opportunity to bash his Republican opponent for governor, Bruce Rauner, who earlier Monday released a statement criticizing Quinn’s home-owner relief program as recycled and not new.
“That’s certainly a bizarre opinion,” Quinn said.
The program, available through the Illinois Housing Development Authority, offers certain first-time home buyers and those who haven’t owned a home in three years a low fixed-rate mortgage and up to $7,500 in down payment assistance.
“We are here to help families who don’t have political action committees, who don’t have lobbyists, who don’t have millions of dollars to buy more than one home …,” Quinn said in a thinly veiled reference to his opponent.
* From the Quinn campaign…
Billionaire Bruce Rauner – who owns nine homes - today went out of his way to criticize a successful state program helping everyday people across Illinois afford their very first home. Welcome Home Illinois will give many people the opportunity to buy their first and only home - but it’s clear this billionaire with nine homes of his own can’t relate. Is achieving the American Dream only for the self-proclaimed .01 percent?
This attack on everyday people again shows that billionaire Bruce Rauner is out-of-touch and doesn’t care about the people of Illinois.
More than 24,000 people have shown interest in Welcome Home Illinois, which provides a 3.75 percent interest rate for a secure, 30-year fixed mortgage.
…Adding…. From the Rauner campaign…
From Spokesman Mike Schrimpf:
Once again Quinnocchio is not being truthful with the people of Illinois - Bruce supported the program in 2005 when it was called I-loan, in 2009 when it was called “Illinois Home Start,” and even in 2011 when it was called “Smart Move. The truth is that Pat Quinn’s job-killing income tax hike continues to make life harder for potential homeowners.
Thoughts?
13 Comments
|
Sun-Times temporarily turns off comments
Monday, Apr 14, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From the managing editor of the Sun-Times…
Starting this weekend, the Chicago Sun-Times and the other titles in the Sun-Times Media group will temporarily cease to run comments with our articles.
The world of Internet commenting offers a marvelous opportunity for discussion and the exchange of ideas. But as anyone who has ever ventured into a comment thread can attest, these forums too often turn into a morass of negativity, racism, hate speech and general trollish behaviors that detract from the content.
In fact, the general tone and demeanor is one of the chief criticisms we hear in regard to the usability and quality of our websites and articles. Not only have we heard your criticisms, but we often find ourselves as frustrated as our readers are with the tone and quality of commentary on our pages.
To that end, we are working on development of a new commenting system we hope will not only allow for free discussion, but encourage increased quality of the commentary and help us better police the worst elements of these threads. We’ll have more in the weeks to come on this development.
* Robert Feder weighs in…
It’s true that unmoderated comment boards — or those that don’t require verification (a Facebook account in the case of my blog) — leave themselves open to abuse. But a big-city daily’s digital news site that summarily shuts off dialogue with its readers strikes me as wrongheaded and backward-thinking to the extreme.
The key word is “unmoderated.” Newspapers and other “old media” have got to get a handle on their sites. Most of them don’t have the cash to hire a full-time comment moderator, so they’ve relied on apps and programs that don’t work very well.
I shut down comments for a while when I used the Blogger platform because I couldn’t effectively moderate comments. I moved over to WordPress and that helped me deal with most of my problems. But monitoring comments, and engaging with commenters to nudge or even shove them back onto the topic at hand ain’t easy. It’s a lot of work. Every time I leave to run an errand (as I’m about to do), I worry about what’s being posted and try to constantly check the blog to make sure all is OK.
So, I have little confidence that a magic program will solve all their problems. If they really want to get at the heart of the issue, they’ll hire somebody to watch over their comments. It’s the only truly effective way to solve this very real problem.
74 Comments
|
Question of the day
Monday, Apr 14, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Mark Brown notes that if Gov. Pat Quinn were running against anyone else, his reception at last week’s IEA forum might not have been so warm, what with pension benefit cuts and cuts to education funding…
But Quinn reminded delegates to the Illinois Education Association that the choice in the upcoming election isn’t between what they want and what he did.
“Please don’t compare me to the Almighty. Compare me to the alternative over here,” Quinn said, gesturing to Rauner, who makes no secret of his antagonism toward teacher unions. […]
Meeting briefly with reporters after the session, Rauner started off by quipping: “I’ve never been called Bruce Almighty before. I kinda like that.” […]
We’ve been needing a nickname for Rauner to go with the Quinnocchio depiction he’s hung on Quinn, and I’d say Bruce Almighty is a perfect fit.
Bruce Almighty: the candidate with the miraculous plan to cut the state income tax back to pre-Quinn levels and still provide more money for education and pay off the state’s backlog of bills.
* The Question: What would your nicknames be for both candidates? Make sure to explain.
73 Comments
|
Fun with money
Monday, Apr 14, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Crain’s…
Andrew Boron, director of the Illinois Department of Insurance, is pushing legislation that would provide $5 million to a new state corporation chaired by Mr. Boron to recruit out-of-state insurers. The money would be siphoned from the fees insurers and insurance brokers pay to fund the state’s regulation of them.
He wants to replicate the success the department had in wooing EquiTrust Life Insurance Co. from suburban Des Moines, Iowa, which is a national hub for life insurers. […]
The $5 million to lure insurers from other states accounts for about 10 percent of the $52 million the Insurance Department receives annually from insurers and brokers.
So, the plan is to take insurance company fee money and use that cash to lure competing insurance companies to Illinois?
I suppose I can see the logic in this, but has anyone thought of just lowering the insurance fees by 10 percent?
21 Comments
|
Reform and renewal
Monday, Apr 14, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Eric Zorn came up with a great analogy about Bruce Rauner’s proposed constitutional amendment for term limits, etc.…
In one of the more memorable scenes in the 1971 comedy “Bananas,” Woody Allen’s character Fielding Mellish is perusing the magazine rack at a small store. He’s trying to sneak peeks at the erotic fare in a way that avoids the notice of a matronly woman at the nearby checkout counter (see YouTube clip below)
He settles on a plan. “I’ll get a copy of Time magazine,” he says, loud enough for the woman to hear, as he takes a copy off the rack. “I’ll take Commentary. And the Saturday Review. And, uh, let’s see, Newsweek, and just I’ll grab one of these…”
He slips one of the skin magazines into the small collection of periodicals he doesn’t really care about, then turns to the cashier. “I’ll take `em all,” he mumbles as the woman looks on from several feet away.
It’s a nice try at misdirection.
Zorn’s premise is that Rauner is attempting to get around the state Constitution’s limit of popular amendments to only “structural and procedural” changes in the the General Assembly’s Article by proposing a change in the number of House and Senate members and an increase in the number of votes to override a gubernatorial veto…
So think of the term limits proposal as the equivalent of the pornographic publication in “Bananas” — the illicit yet true object of desire.
And think of the other two elements on the Committee for Legislative Reform and Term Limits petition as the equivalent of Saturday Review and Newsweek — conventional, but, really, beside the point.
Both are clearly constititutional.
* Meanwhile, the Tribune editorialized again in favor of a different constitutional amendment for redistricting reform…
Next comes the inevitable lawsuit, challenging the constitutionality or the language of the amendment, or both. It would fall to the Illinois Supreme Court, whose members were elected with party support, to decide whether the measure stays on the ballot.
Then there’s the big disinformation campaign, on which millions will be spent to convince voters that the amendment is bad for them. Already, the state’s top Democrats are voicing disingenuous concerns that the measure could reduce minority representation.
Um, I wonder who’s gonna spend “millions” to fight this? The unions will be spending all they can to defeat Rauner. The House and Senate Democrats will be spending cash on their own races, along with the state party.
Is there a pro-status quo millionaire out there who will step in and throw big money away attempting to defeat a proposal which has overwhelming popular support? I kinda doubt it.
* And Paul Green, writing in the Daily Herald, gets the last word again…
Reform is a many splendored thing. You want to be a reformer? It’s easy; simply call yourself one, e.g., every Chicago mayor since 1837 has labeled himself or herself — a reformer. As we meander into the Illinois General Assembly’s closing weeks of session and ponder the upcoming November general elections, once again its “Reform Time — Illinois Style”.
Some “reformers” want to change how Illinois legislative maps are drawn. Other “reformers” want to initiate term limits for state legislators, while almost everyone claiming reform DNA — constantly use the terms “transparency” and accountability” like those words have some biblical meaning to frame their intentions.
Statewide reform goals and philosophy aside, the main target for all this activity is Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan. Reformers lament and criticize “The Speaker’s” power, influence and durability, especially in his control of the Illinois House.
Alas, what is seldom if ever mentioned, is that Speaker Madigan was created — you guessed it — by reformers. Yes, my friends, over 30 years ago, a youngish reformer (who now happens to be Illinois governor) led a constitutional crusade to end cumulative voting for electing Illinois House members.
It was called the “Cut-back” Amendment” — it created single member districts, reduced House membership from 177 to 118 members and obliterated independent Republicans from Chicago and independent Democrats from suburban Cook and the Collars. And it gave a shrewd and workaholic Mike Madigan the opportunity to create a power base that would have been impossible pre-Cut-back.
Ergo, beware of reform promises. Or, said another way, if folks are promising a New Deal, make sure you cut the cards.
* Related…
* ADDED: House votes to make secret government severance deals public
* AARP backs changes to redistricting process
* Baar-Topinka tells broadcasters term limits are stupid
25 Comments
|
Simple solutions are usually neither
Monday, Apr 14, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Greg Hinz writes about the costs of Chicago pension reform…
Some critics want to tap the city’s tax- increment financing system rather than raise property taxes $50 million each of the next five years, as Mr. Emanuel’s plan requires.
TIFs are a big, juicy target for those who want to protect homeowners. The city’s 153 TIF districts have a total of $1.7 billion in the bank and generate another $400 million-plus each year.
But roughly $1.5 billion of the $1.7 billion is already committed for projects such as an $800 million school construction plan announced a few years ago, a $15 million Chinatown library, an $18 million Albany Park library and a $12 million streetscape project for Devon Avenue, says Budget Director Alexandra Holt. She didn’t detail all $1.5 billion, but I have no reason to doubt her. With a couple of exceptions, the money is going to neighborhood projects, not downtown handouts.
Similarly, much of future years’ receipts are committed for things such as a $50 million el station at Cermak Road, a $9 million industrial project in Pilsen and debt payments. And total receipts are beginning to drop quickly, as TIF districts with a legal 23-year life begin to expire, like the huge $120 million-a-year Near South TIF.
Ironically, because of the tax hike for pensions, the TIF districts are expected to produce about $20 million in additional revenue, Ms. Holt says. The city will declare that money a surplus and apply its $4.6 million share to pensions, potentially softening the blow of the property tax increase.
* A recent Sun-Times editorial also looked at various options…
What about a Chicago casino, which also requires state approval? That’s worth pursuing but can’t be counted on for now. If lawmakers ever approve, casino revenue is years away and inherently unpredictable. At its peak, perhaps five to seven years into its life, revenue could reach $80 million to $120 million, city officials tell us. […]
The Chicago Teachers Union and others have pushed a financial transaction tax and eliminating tax-increment-financing districts, both of which sound good on paper but have more downsides than pluses.
State actions: Emanuel has advocated for expanding the narrow list of items subject to the sales tax to cover services (think dry cleaning and hair salons). If done right, this could generate more revenue overall while also lowering the tax rate. Quinn is opposed, but an expanded sales tax that matches the modern economy could benefit the entire state. It’s also what most states do. Lawmakers also could increase the share of state income tax revenue shared with municipalities, including Chicago. That was cut in 2011, costing Chicago more than $400 million. The downside, of course, is that the state needs the money.
* Meanwhile, the Chicago Tribune has editorialized strongly in favor of the city’s pension reform bill…
The Illinois General Assembly delivered a special package Tuesday to the Chicago City Council: a pension fix that probably requires aldermen to raise property taxes — less than a year before they stand for re-election.
Given the terrible finances of the city’s pension funds, Gov. Pat Quinn has no responsible choice other than to sign the bill, and the aldermen have little choice but to raise taxes.
So, to sum up, the Trib is in favor of higher property taxes to help solve the city’s historic pension underfunding problems, but totally against an income tax hike to help solve the state’s historic pension underfunding problems.
Go figure.
* And that leads us to this Eric Zorn post listing four reasons why a Chicago income tax should be considered…
But if the alternative is a significant decrease in city services leading to a deteriorating quality of civic life, a city income tax is among the least objectionable options for balancing the books.
* The city’s media ran stories last week about how Mayor Emanuel had completely ruled out the idea…
Mayor Rahm Emanuel on Wednesday ruled out creating a city income tax as a way to shore up the city’s municipal and laborers’ retirement funds while describing the $250 million property tax increase he wants to pay for the pension changes as “a measured way, a responsible way to address the question.”
* Glossed over in all of this is an important point noted in that above-linked Sun-Times editorial…
Emanuel is opposed to a city income tax, which must be approved by Springfield. [Emphasis added.]
* From the Illinois Constitution…
SECTION 6. POWERS OF HOME RULE UNITS
… A home rule unit shall have only the power that the General Assembly may provide by law (1) to punish by imprisonment for more than six months or (2) to license for revenue or impose taxes upon or measured by income or earnings or upon occupations.
* Paul Green has the last word…
Illinois governments at all levels are facing financial disasters and yet various “stakeholders” (I love that word) are bickering as if time were on their side. These stakeholders hope that somehow pension debt and overdue bill payment will be “hoped” away.
The specifics of these crises in Springfield and Chicago are economically complicated, politically toxic and do not lend themselves to a 30 second political commercial. However, the general parameters of the problem are not so complicated. Governments have promised more than they could deliver.
Incoming revenue does not meet expenditure needs, and to resolve these issues everyone in Illinois (Chicago included) has to lose something.
In short, this is a math exam, not an essay test.
25 Comments
|
* My weekly syndicated newspaper column…
A long time ago I asked Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan why he never golfed at his golf outing fundraisers.
Madigan explained that he was a terrible golfer (he’s since improved, I’m told) If people saw him embarrassing himself badly on the golf course, they might take a dimmer view of him as a leader.
He has applied this lesson to just about everything he does. He examines every angle before he acts. He hates mistakes and almost never acts precipitously or impetuously.
For example, Madigan and his staff gather a few times a week to read through every bill and every amendment to those bills to look for flaws, hidden agendas or to discuss strategies. He always wants to be as prepared as possible.
As a result, he rarely fails.
But something else has been happening over the past year or so.
Madigan has become a media hound.
The Speaker has never really sought media attention. He does what he does, and then he goes home, or, more likely, back to his office. A Republican friend of mine calls him “James Bond.”
But after getting royally hammered by the Chicago media over how he asked Metra to give one of his loyal patronage workers a raise, he’s seemed to change. Nowadays, he seeks publicity, and credit.
It started after the House passed the gay marriage bill. It wasn’t an easy task by any means and Madigan publicly took the credit for its passage. A few months later, he took the lion’s share of the credit for passing the long-sought pension reform bill.
Then, earlier this year, out of the blue, he proposed a 50 percent cut in the corporate income tax rate. He got a ton of media coverage, but he hasn’t yet followed up on it. It looked like a “press release bill.” Legislation unveiled merely to generate media interest. It might yet resurface, but as of now it has been disappeared into the ether.
Madigan was also working behind the scenes this spring with the Senate Democrats on a constitutional amendment to impose a three percent surcharge on income over a million dollars. But then Madigan went ahead with his own announcement of the proposal. It was referred to in pretty much all media reports as “Madigan’s millionaire tax.”
At the time of the unveiling, Madigan said he’d done his homework and had talked to his members before announcing his proposal. The constitutional amendment required a three-fifths super majority, so Madigan would need every single one of his Democrats if he couldn’t lock down any House Republican votes.
Rep. Jack Franks, a Democrat who prides himself on never voting for tax hikes, offered tentative early support, but his support was tied to allowing the 2011 income tax hike to expire. Just days later, Madigan publicly supported keeping the tax hike permanent.
Rep. Franks says he told the Speaker that he couldn’t back the proposed constitutional amendment a couple weeks ago. Madigan asked for time to try and find GOP votes. In the meantime other Democrats went off the reservation, including Rep. Scott Drury, who issued a press release last week announcing his opposition. The momentum was going too fast the other way, so the plug was pulled.
Madigan, through a spokesman, blamed the Republicans for the proposal’s defeat. But Madigan had surprised the Republicans with his plan’s unveiling, instead of finding some GOP support in advance.
As it turns out, Madigan simply bit off more than he could chew. His proposal failed, but he sure got a lot of publicity about it, much of it favorable.
And, hey, lemons into lemonade. Pro-business groups like Americans for Prosperity Illinois offered up praise for Rep. Drury, who faces a Republican opponent in November. Drury and Franks, “should be commended for siding with taxpayers and small businesses by taking a courageous stand against this proposal,” said AFP Illinois State Director David From via press release. That’ll surely make Drury more palatable to tax sensitive business owners in his district.
And the proposal put Republican gubernatorial candidate Bruce Rauner in a difficult spot. Rauner flatly opposed the tax, while leaving open the possibility that he could favor taxing retirement income and services. It didn’t make him look good.
Maybe this is all part of some grand scheme. But right now it sure looks like James Bond has gone tabloid.
26 Comments
|
Comments Off
|
Comments Off
|
Your post-debate moment of Zen
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I just did a quick read-through of the comments on the Rauner vs. Quinn at the IEA event post. You guys did a tremendous job. I’ll bet you’re all still kinda keyed up, so here’s something to chill everybody out before the weekend.
Oscar the Puppy and I have been playing a fun new game recently…
5 Comments
|
Question of the day
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* NBC 5…
A bill preventing the use of police ticket quotas passed in the Illinois Senate Thursday in a 57-1 vote.
The legislation would prevent ticket quotas at any state, county and municipal police departments. It also states that departments would not be allowed to evaluate an officer’s performance based on the number of citations they issue.
The bill had the support of 19 sponsors in the Senate, including Sen. Kirk Dillard. The Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police, however, fought the measures.
* SJ-R…
Republican Sen. Tim Bivins, the lone “no” vote, said the bill would give the small percentage of officers who don’t want to do their jobs incentive to slack off.
Bivins, a former sheriff in Lee County, said that if the bill passes, it would take discretion out of the hands of management and could be the first step toward “circumventing the collective bargaining practice that exists.”
But Manar argued that officers need more discretion, calling the bill “necessary because a quota takes away from a police officer’s ability to use good judgment.”
He also said local governments are often tempted to use law enforcement quota policies as a way to raise revenue.
* The Question: Have you ever experienced a traffic ticket situation where you believed the police officer didn’t have the discretion to issue a simple warning? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
panel management
34 Comments
|
Not taking the bait
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The best way for the Democrats to use this “voter suppression” amendment to gin up turnout is to hope that somebody, somewhere trashes it and they hype that negative comment in hopes of angering their base. The Republicans have mostly refused to take the bait so far. Sun-Times…
Without opposition, House Speaker Michael Madigan’s plan to amend the Illinois Constitution to ban voter-suppression tactics passed the Senate Thursday.
The measure, which needed 36 votes to pass in the Senate, cleared the chamber 52-0 and will appear on the November 4th ballot after having passed the House earlier this week. […]
Sen. Matt Murphy, R-Palatine, said this would allow voters “unfettered access” to exercise their voting rights.
“We take seriously that fundamental, quintessential concept of the right to vote,” he said. “We can send a message and make clear with this bill right here that it doesn’t matter what your surname is, if you have earned that right to vote, you will not be impeded in any way in exercising it.”
* Even tea party Sen. Kyle McCarter held his tongue…
“We’ve heard the stories from around the nation of states implementing laws specifically to limit the right to vote,” said Sen. Kwame Raoul, D-Chicago. “This is definitely intended to discourage voter ID laws because of their disparate impact.”
Statistics have shown the poor, elderly and minority voters are less likely to have the photo IDs needed in some states in order to vote.
“In the county where I reside, we’ve had issues,” said Sen. Kyle McCarter, R-Lebanon. “If a (photo ID) is not available, we should make it available. I firmly believe we should have a voter ID law that does not discriminate.”
McCarter did not vote on the amendment.
* Meanwhile, a handful of liberal Democrats were crushed in the House yesterday…
Spurred by a gun-rights activist’s scrape with the law, the Illinois House voted Thursday to block state conservation police from going into someone’s home or onto their yards to enforce state hunting laws without search warrants.
The measure sponsored by House Minority Leader Jim Durkin, R-Western Springs, arose after National Rifle Association lobbyist Todd Vandermyde was cited last December by Department of Natural Resources police on private hunting ground. […]
(S)tate Rep. Ann Williams, D-Chicago, another gun-control advocate, rose up to raise questions about the precedent the House was setting with the issue and voiced concern about any similar, potential efforts to water down safety components of the newly enacted concealed-carry law, which Vandermyde helped draft.
“I don’t think the best genesis for changing those laws is something that stems out of a violation,” Williams said.
House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie, D-Chicago, Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, D-Chicago, and Rep. Robyn Gabel, D-Evanston, were the other “no” votes on the legislation, which Durkin said was supported by state conservation police.
The bill passed 102-5.
21 Comments
|
Tone it down, please
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* You may have read this advertorial yesterday…
Uber’s lies and deception over the last month are an affront to Representative Zalewski and the entire General Assembly. Uber’s representatives, including their Worldwide Director of Policy, participated in lengthy negotiations. Uber, in writing, requested 13 changes to HB 4075.
All 13 changes have been addressed.
Eight changes were fully accepted.
Four changes were addressed through a part-time / full-time compromise for drivers.
The final change was negotiated by Uber, the Illinois Insurance Association and Illinois Trial Lawyers Association.
We were under the impression from the negotiations that the deal would be acceptable to Uber.
* Uber did, indeed, get just about everything it wanted in those negotiations. But it’s now hyperventilating to the media after the House passed the negotiated bill. Sun-Times…
The Illinois House voted 80-26 on a proposal that would require all ridesharing companies to conduct driver background checks, safety training and have commercial liability insurance. Ridesharing drivers would be restricted from using taxi loading zones. Those drivers logging more than 18 hours would need registration plates, a chauffer’s license, and vehicle safety inspections.
Ridesharing companies would still be allowed to use price surging, or raising prices in times of high demand. […]
“The passage of HB4075 in its current form destroys thousands of jobs in Chicago, slashes income opportunities for Chicago’s rideshare drivers, and effectively shuts down uberX in Chicago,” said Andrew Macdonald, Uber Chicago general manager, in a prepared statement.
“Today is a win for the corporate taxi special interests and a loss for the thousands of Uber users in Chicago who banded together in short order to save ridesharing in Illinois and were effectively ignored,” he said.
…Adding… Rep. Mike Zalewski and the cab companies are right about this point…
Zalewski told WBEZ that Uber’s lobbyist in Springfield, attorney Michael Kasper, supported the idea of bifurcating drivers into different regulatory categories depending on how much time they work. “I can only negotiate with who Uber tells me to negotiate with,” he said, “and their representatives were willing to negotiate on this point.”
But almost immediately after the bill passed, Uber denied that it was consulted in the crafting of the bill. “Uber has not signed off on a proposal that bifurcates drivers,” said Andrew MacDonald, Regional General Manager of Uber Midwest. Lyft issued a similar statement: “Bifurcating drivers into two groups was not a compromise and we did not support this model in conversations with the bill sponsors.”
“That’s an outright lie,” said Pat Corrigan, a Principal at Yellow Group and representative of the Illinois Transportation Trade Association, which includes nearly all of Chicago’s taxi companies. “We talked to Uber representatives, including Michael Kasper, their lobbyist, over the weekend in an attempt to understand how we could satisfy their wishes.” Kasper did not respond to an e-mail by posting time.
* Look, bills are never perfect. And the ride sharing companies could still ask for changes in the Illinois Senate. But it’s not a bad deal at all and that hyperbole from Uber just looks like crazy talk.
But it’s to be expected, I suppose.
* From an Inc. profile of Uber CEO Travis Kalanick…
[Uber] also has an aggressive culture and growth strategy set by a CEO who is so headstrong, so enthusiastic, and so combative in defense of his big idea that he is at risk of seeming like a parody of today’s tech entrepreneur–up to and including having a thing for Ayn Rand. You hear a lot about tech companies shaking up staid industries, pushing past slow, complacent competitors. This is the next phase. This is Silicon Valley’s cult of disruption taking on city hall. […]
When quiet negotiations with city officials don’t seem to be getting him anywhere, he has a tendency to lash out, often by implying that the people standing in his way are corrupt. […]
Kalanick does his part to bait his critics. He can be at times comically grandiose and un-self-aware. When I ask him why he left angel investing (which he was doing after selling Red Swoosh) to run Uber, his rambling, five-minute answer includes two hyperbolic claims, a mixed metaphor (”It’s so complex all you can do is swim in uncertainty”), childish whimsy (”that is my happy place”), and, believe it or not, an unironic Braveheart reference.
“That’s part of me, that freedom fighter in me,” he says. “It’s like Braveheart. Like, ‘freeeeeduuuuuuuuum.’ ”
I strongly defended Uber last month when the taxi companies came after it. Their original bill was grotesque. This bill is far from that.
8 Comments
|
Rauner offers preview of today’s IEA forum
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* We’ll have live video coverage today at 2 o’clock of the Illinois Education Association’s forum featuring both Gov. Pat Quinn and Bruce Rauner, so make sure to check back.
Rauner’s campaign put out a preview release today and Illinois Review provided a good summation of the candidate’s expected talking points…
“Bruce has pledged to increase education funding as governor. He believes education is the most important thing we do as a community and should be the top priority in Illinois,” a campaign statement says.
Secondly, Rauner is “personally devoted to the cause.” Rauner has invested time and resources to improving education in Illinois by leading the Chicago Public Education Fund, which helped more teachers achieve National Board Certification, and he has personally funded a Chicago program aimed at financially rewarding the best performing principals,” the statement says.
Rauner also claims his investment firm has helped the Teacher Retirement System by producing “tremendous results.” The Rauner campaign points to comments made by Governor Quinn’s own spokesperson concerning GTCR, an investment firm Rauner founded. […]
Rauner will remind the teachers that their IEA President Cinda Klickna Led Motion to Invest in GTCR back in 2003. […]
Rauner will pitch that he wants teachers to control their retirement savings - rather than leave it in the hands of “union bosses,” something he’s likely to leave unsaid in his sales pitch.
No kidding he won’t. The phrase “union bosses” appears nowhere in the press release. Here’s what it said on that topic…
Bruce believes teachers should be able to keep the pensions that they’ve honestly accrued, but moving forward they should be shifted into a defined-contribution style system that puts teachers in charge instead of the politicians.
“Politicians” are now the targets.
26 Comments
|
About that crime victims’ amendment
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Back in 1992, Illinois voters approved a new constitutional amendment…
SECTION 8.1. CRIME VICTIM’S RIGHTS.
(a) Crime victims, as defined by law, shall have the following rights as provided by law:
(1) The right to be treated with fairness and respect for their dignity and privacy throughout the criminal justice process.
(2) The right to notification of court proceedings.
(3) The right to communicate with the prosecution.
(4) The right to make a statement to the court at sentencing.
(5) The right to information about the conviction, sentence, imprisonment, and release of the accused.
(6) The right to timely disposition of the case following the arrest of the accused.
(7) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused throughout the criminal justice process.
(8) The right to be present at the trial and all other court proceedings on the same basis as the accused, unless the victim is to testify and the court determines that the victim’s testimony would be materially affected if the victim hears other testimony at the trial.
(9) The right to have present at all court proceedings, subject to the rules of evidence, an advocate or other support person of the victim’s choice.
(10) The right to restitution.
(b) The General Assembly may provide by law for the enforcement of this Section.
(c) The General Assembly may provide for an assessment against convicted defendants to pay for crime victims’ rights.
(d) Nothing in this Section or in any law enacted under this Section shall be construed as creating a basis for vacating a conviction or a ground for appellate relief in any criminal case.
There was a lot of false or misleading info in comments yesterday about the new constitutional amendment, which will go before voters this November. So, let’s clear up a few things.
* The big compromise back in 1992 was that no “enforcement” provision would be put into the Constitution. The enforcement provision in state statute doesn’t give victims any standing.
From the Marsy’s Law website…
Why is a constitutional amendment necessary?
The Illinois Constitution currently guarantees crime victims certain rights, but these rights are technically unenforceable, making them ineffective and weak… Illinois is the only state that actually bars the enforcement of victims’ rights.
* When the attorney general’s office held discussions on this topic a few years ago, it was decided that the best way to proceed was through another constitutional amendment. This is from AG Madigan’s office…
Illinois has both a constitutional and statutory Victims’ Bill of Rights. Article I, Section 8.1 of the Illinois Constitution states that “nothing in the section addressing the rights of crime victims or any law enacted under the section shall be construed as creating a basis for vacating a conviction or a ground for appellate relief in any criminal case.”
Consequently, victims who are denied their rights have no redress because the denial is literally not subject to any kind of review. Because the problem lies with the Constitution, the only way to correct it is via constitutional amendment.
* The Illinois State Bar Association was opposed to a similar effort two years ago and testified against it. The group opposed it this year, but didn’t testify. They weren’t even in the room during the two public hearings. That’s usually Statehouse code for “we got the best, least offensive deal possible.”
* The new amendment gives victims some more rights, including…
The right to be heard at any post-arraignment court proceeding in which a right of the victim is at issue and any court proceeding involving a post-arraignment release decision, plea, or sentencing
They also would now have the right to be notified of the conviction, sentence, etc., instead of just the right to the information.
* There’s also this…
The right to have the safety of the victim and the victim’s family considered in denying or fixing the amount of bail, determining whether to release the defendant, and setting conditions of release after arrest and conviction.
* But while the victims are given standing, there are clear restrictions…
The victim has standing to assert the rights enumerated in subsection (a) in any court exercising jurisdiction over the case. The court shall promptly rule on a victim’s request.
The victim does not have party status. The accused does not have standing to assert the rights of a victim. The court shall not appoint an attorney for the victim under this Section.
Nothing in this Section shall be construed to alter the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the prosecuting attorney. […]
Nothing in this Section or any law enacted under this Section creates a cause of action in equity or at law for compensation, attorney’s fees, or damages against the State, a political subdivision of the State, an officer, employee, or agent of the State or of any political subdivision of the State, or an officer or employee of the court.
These are all quite reasonable changes and that’s why it was overwhelmingly approved by both chambers.
* And, believe it or not, big kudos go to Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez. Alvarez led the charge against this effort two years ago, but when changes were made and AG Madigan convinced her to switch positions she forcefully argued for the new draft. She even reportedly convinced DuPage County State’s Attorney Robert Berlin to back off his opposition. Berlin also hotly opposed the effort to amend the Constitution two years ago.
18 Comments
|
Culture wars alive and well in GA
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I have no idea why she called this bill yesterday when 20 members were absent from the chambers…
A bid to block therapists from engaging in “conversion therapy” with gay, bisexual and transgender youth in order to make them heterosexual failed Thursday in the Illinois House.
The measure, proposed by Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, lost on a 44-51 roll call despite her plea to colleagues to stop gay, bisexual and transgender teens 17 and under from being “horribly and humiliatingly abused.”
“This treatment plan causes depression, causes suicidal actions and is incredibly harmful to children,” said Cassidy, who is openly lesbian and one of the lead architects of Illinois’ same-sex marriage law.
“The practice of conversion therapy is dismissed by every major scientific organization and should not be utilized. There’s not a single scientific basis for one’s sex orientation being a disorder,” she said. “We need to protect our children.”
* The Illinois Family Institute was overjoyed…
In an article last month on this issue, IFI’s Laurie Higgins pointed out that the “ultimate motivation behind this legislation is to promote the Leftist assumptions of adult homosexuals who seek to wipe disapproval of homosexual acts from the face of the planet even if doing requires deception, harms children, undermines parental rights, and corrodes fundamental First Amendment speech and religious liberty.”
In a remarkable display of rhetorical excess, Cassidy argued that minors who desire to change their unwanted same-sex attraction through counseling are “horribly and humiliatingly abused.” It boggles the mind that Cassidy would expect her colleagues to believe that every counselor who helps minors with unwanted same-sex attraction “horribly and humiliatingly” abuses their young clients. Further, Cassidy expected her colleagues to believe her without any conclusive studies to support such an outlandish claim.
It defies logic that “progressives” believe that gender-confused minors should be able to receive treatment to change their unwanted “gender identity” but not their unwanted sexual preferences.
* Meanwhile, Rep. Cassidy did pass a bill yesterday recommended by Illinois’ Bullying Prevention Task Force. Illinois Review’s take…
Rep. Cassidy said that the ban on bullying was needed because of students with disabilities being “tortured” and biracial students being “attacked.” Cassidy said, as she called for the House floor vote, that she was bullied as a student, not because of being a gay student, but because she held strong religious convictions.
“The fact that the bill’s sponsors and the ACLU have refused to ensure the rights of students and school employees to opt-out of ‘programming’ and ‘training’ that promote ideas that conflict with their personal and/or religious beliefs reveals the real goal,” Illinois Family Institute said in a statement issued after the bill passed.
That goal, IFI says, is to use public education to promote unproven, non-factual beliefs about the nature and morality of homosexuality and “transgenderism.”
* And quite a large number of pro-life legislators opposed a bill that would increase protections for pregnant mothers in the workplace…
The bill, which moves now to the Senate, requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for pregnant employees, if so requested, unless the employer can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the business’ ordinary operation.
Also, it would be considered a civil rights violation if an employer denies employment opportunities or benefits to a pregnant woman, or takes adverse action against an otherwise qualified job applicant or employee. The employers may not require an employee or job applicant to accept an accommodation offered or force that employee to take leave.
State Rep. Jeanne Ives (R-Wheaton) said that she was pregnant twice while serving in the military, was provided numerous considerations while expecting and understood the need to make accommodations for pregnancy. However, the mother of five was concerned about a possible rise in litigation the bill would fuel.
* More…
Flowers’ bill would make employers permit frequent bathroom breaks, water breaks, seating, assistance with manual labor, less physically demanding duties, adjustment of the work schedule, time off to recover from childbirth, leave and break space for breast feeding. […]
Rep. Ron Sandack, R-Downers Grove, who voted against the legislation, said “no one’s against pregnant women” but said the bill goes too far.
“It’s problematic because it expands rights beyond what’s already provided in federal law,” he said. “It has many undefined terms that could be abused.” […]
But Flowers said litigation didn’t erupt in California after it enacted a similar law.
25 Comments
|
Turning a corner?
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* We still have a long way to go, and if the pension reform law is struck down all heck is gonna break loose. But good news shouldn’t be ignored. Paul Merrion at Crain’s…
On its latest sale of $250 million in long-term debt, the state got much better interest rates than just a few months ago on a similar package sized at $1 billion.
Bank of America/Merrill Lynch had the winning bid [yesterday] with an overall interest rate of 4.08 percent on the general obligation bonds, compared with 4.46 percent interest a small group of investment firms agreed to pay on a $1 billion bond deal in February.
Since then, the state’s worst-in-the nation credit rating hasn’t changed, but Gov. Pat Quinn issued a five-year budget plan and called for a continuation of temporary income tax hikes that were supposed to start phasing out next year, which the credit rating agencies embraced. […]
The difference between the current rate for AAA-rated borrowers and the state’s interest rate this week was about one quarter of a percentage point less than it was in February for bonds maturing in 2029. That works out to an 18 percent reduction in the yield penalty to Illinois.
* Meanwhile, Standard & Poor’s took a look at both the governor’s “recommended” budget and his “not-recommended” budget. The ratings agency obviously doesn’t care for the not-recommended budget, which doesn’t include a full year’s worth of revenue from the tax hike…
The state achieves budget balance in the not-recommended budget with $2 billion of proposed spending reductions. Total expenditures under that scenario are $29.4 billion, or 6.5% below fiscal 2014 spending levels; total and expenditures and transfers would be $34.6 billion, or 5.6% below 2014 levels. Spending reductions would be across the board in broad program areas excluding debt service, pensions, and most of the Medicaid program. Pension costs in the budget do not include the impact of recently enacted pension reform; the costs are budgeted at $6.2 billion, or 4.3% above fiscal 2014. Education funding under this scenario would decline about $1 billion and other general program areas also decline significantly.
We believe that the not-recommended budget could weaken structural alignment for Illinois.
That last line could be bigtime political ammo for Gov. Pat Quinn against those, like Bruce Rauner, who want to allow the tax hike to expire.
* S&P isn’t overly thrilled with the recommended budget, but they do appear to prefer it…
The recommended budget could contribute to enhanced structural alignment due to less severe spending reductions needed to achieve balance, but it still relies on nonrecurring resources, such as the interfund loan, as well as continued progress on Medicaid reform and other cost containment measures.
* And while expressing some constitutional and other reservations about the recent pension reform law, S&P wrote “we believe it would provide significant budget relief and substantially improve funded ratios over time.”
* There was also this historical perspective…
On many levels, Illinois’ credit quality is a study in contrasts. In our opinion, despite a long history of structural budget imbalance and weak pension funding levels, the protections for general obligation (GO) bonds are strong. Even during the Great Recession’s depths, when liquidity was extremely strained, the state’s commitment to bondholders was steadfast, in our view, and remained a policy focus. The recent pension reform further highlights this, with specific statutory provisions that subordinate pension payments to debt service. We believe the provisions relating to GO debt are longstanding and strong in supporting the priority of payment for debt service.
Illinois does not have to deal with constitutional or statutory revenue limitations, has what we consider to be a broad and diverse economy with above-average wealth levels, and has flexibility to adjust spending levels. However, despite these strengths, structural imbalance has been a regular feature of its budget position for many years.
* But…
Although the state has implemented improvements in budget and financial management practices, they have not been robust enough to offset the sluggish economy and the accumulated structural budget deficit. Illinois’ budgetary performance, rising unfunded pension liability, and legislative inaction on many fronts contributed to a pattern of credit deterioration since 2008; as a result, we have lowered our rating four times. This is at odds with the state sector’s credit performance as a whole. Only time will tell which path credit quality moves. As such, our developing outlook best reflects the state of Illinois’ credit quality, in that it might improve — or get worse — in the next two years.
* Related…
* Cullerton: ‘I confess: I like Illinois’
25 Comments
|
Rate the new Rauner ad
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From Diana Rauner…
Hi.
The response to the TV ad we released last week has been great. The ad was a lot of fun for Bruce and me to make.
But I wanted to share a little more about why I think Bruce will make an excellent governor for every Illinoisan.
Watch here: bit.ly/1eot4vD
I hope you enjoy our new ad.
And if you’re interested in volunteering for the campaign please click here.
Thank you for all that you’re doing to bring back Illinois.
Diana
* Rate it…
…Adding… I forgot to include the cable buy stats. I don’t have the network buy info as of yet…
Citizens for Rauner
Republican candidate for Governor of Illinois
Agency: Access Media, Los Angeles
Total schedule: $82,256
Flight Dates: 4/11/14 - 4/17/14
Networks: BRVO, FOOD, HGTV, TVL, USA
Dayparts: 9A-4P, 4-7P, 7P-Midnight
Syscodes / zones / $ by zone
5170 / Chicago Interconnect / $68, 880
9804 / DirecTV / $7,917
9810 / DISH / $5,459
90 Comments
|
“Whatever it is, you look good”
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Here’s something you won’t see every day, particularly from me.
I came up with what I thought was a pretty good column idea for Crain’s Chicago Business. My editor, Tom Corfman, liked it and gave it a green light.
But then I wrote myself into a hopeless corner. That happens sometimes. It’s never pleasant. I worked on it and worked on it and thought I fixed it, but Corfman didn’t think I had. I read it again and realized he was right.
Uh-oh.
I labored over some revisions, but unbeknownst to me, Corfman also put some effort into it. His revision was far better than mine so we went with his changes.
* I usually hate it when somebody else touches what I write, unless it’s a typo or something like that. But I gotta give props to Corfman here. He made this column work…
For the past few years, whenever I’d get a haircut I could always count on people asking, “Have you lost weight?”
In reality, I’d probably gained weight and I would sometimes say that. “Well, whatever it is, you look good,” I’d hear.
For the past couple of months, though, folks have been telling me they loved my new haircut.
But I’ve been telling them, I’ve only had one haircut in three months. “Well, whatever it is, you look good,” they’ve been replying.
I couldn’t figure out why so many people loved my nonexistent haircut until it finally dawned on me that I’d…
Go read the whole thing.
17 Comments
|
Comments Off
|
Support clean energy: Fix the RPS
Thursday, Apr 10, 2014 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
The Illinois renewable portfolio standard (the RPS) was passed into law in 2007 and requires 25% of the state’s power to come from clean sources by 2025. The RPS made Illinois a leader in renewable energy development between 2008 – 2012. Yet a glitch in state law has broken the RPS, halting renewable energy development and leaving Illinois behind as the market grows.
Maintaining a strong RPS is #1 priority for growing clean energy businesses in Illinois. Legislation now pending in the General Assembly would fix the RPS and jumpstart billions of dollars of clean energy development.
Click below to meet Illinois clean energy workers and find out more about the important role this industry plays in our state’s economy. Let’s make Illinois a clean energy leader again – support the RPS fix!
WWW.CLEANJOBSILLINOIS.COM
Comments Off
|
* From a press release…
State Senator Heather Steans (D-Chicago 7th) has secured passage of “Marsy’s Law,” an amendment that would strengthen the Illinois Constitution’s Crime Victims’ Bill of Rights. The Senate unanimously approved the resolution to put the amendment on the November 2014 ballot.
“Today is the culmination of years of work to ensure that victims’ rights not only are a part of our constitution but will be promptly enforced,” Steans said. “This amendment is about safeguarding victims’ dignity, privacy, right to information and right to be heard throughout the extremely difficult process of bringing the perpetrator to justice.”
“I commend Senator Steans on her tireless advocacy and work to improve the treatment of victims and their families in their quest for justice,” Senate President John Cullerton said. “Because of this amendment, victims across the state may be given more opportunities to secure a sense of justice and closure.”
Marsy’s Law for Illinois is part of a nationwide movement to codify crime victims’ rights in every state. The push began in California, where the brother of murder victim Marsy Nicholas worked for the passage of a state constitutional amendment after his mother was confronted in a grocery store by Marsy’s accused killer, who had been released on bail with no notification to the family. In Illinois, Steans worked with Marsy’s Law for Illinois, House sponsor Representative Lou Lang (D-Skokie), Attorney General Lisa Madigan, the Illinois Coalition Against Sexual Assault and many law enforcement agencies and anti-violence groups to achieve strong victim protections that do not compromise the criminal justice system’s duty to public safety.
The Illinois Constitution currently contains a Crime Victims’ Bill of Rights but does not provide an avenue for victims to assert those rights in court. If approved by voters, the amendment would require courts to hear and rule on a crime victim’s request for enforcement of any of his or her constitutional rights. Marsy’s Law would also add important protections, such as establishing that judges must take into consideration the safety of the victim and the victim’s family members when fixing bail, determining whether to release a defendant and setting conditions of release.
Both the House and Senate have now approved HJRCA 1, which will appear on ballots this November. Marsy’s Law will become part of the Illinois Constitution if three-fifths of those voting on the ballot question (or a majority of those voting in the election) vote in its favor.
The proposal is here. It passed the Senate 59-0.
25 Comments
|
Question of the day
Thursday, Apr 10, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From WUIS…
The Quinn campaign is criticizing Rauner for not doing enough to denounce Cellini, but when reporters asked him about it in the Capitol, Quinn said: “Well I don’t want to get into politics here.”
And then went on to talk for more than a minute, saying of Cellini, “he’s now a convicted felon and I certainly don’t want to have anything to do with him personally and I think anybody who aspires to this office should say clear of him, and make that crystal clear to the people of Illinois.”
But leading up to the 2006 election, then Lt. Gov Quinn stood by Blagojevich, even though media reports had catalogued many allegations of corruption.
A reporter asked Quinn why the Rauner/Cellini situation is any different from his support of Blagojevich.
Again, Quinn said “I’m not going to get into any politics.”
And this time, he meant it.
* The Bruce Rauner campaign sent along this Quinn quote…
Quinn on Blagojevich: “He’s always been a person who’s honest and one of integrity…I have confidence the governor does the right thing all the time.” (Daily Herald, 9/15/06)
* And this statement…
“Pat Quinn knew about Rod Blagojevich’s corrupt dealings and vouched for him anyway, calling Blago ‘honest’ and ‘ethical’ and someone who ‘always does the right thing,’” Rauner Campaign Spokesman Mike Schrimpf said. “This is the biggest lie yet from Quinnocchio.”
* And this photo…
Heh.
* The Question: Caption?
67 Comments
|
* Bruce Rauner talked to Bernie about Bill Cellini’s presence at a Republican event this week…
“I found out last night he was there,” Rauner said. “I didn’t know he was there. Bill Cellini’s a bad guy. I wish he wasn’t at the room yesterday. I didn’t know who was in the room, and I’m not happy he was there. He’s not a good person.”
I contacted Cellini to let him know what Rauner said.
“I’m sorry he would feel that way since he has never met me and I’ve never met him,” Cellini said. “I made no effort to talk to him; he made no effort to talk to me. … Keep in mind that this dinner was not a Rauner event. I attended with the full knowledge that this was an appreciation dinner to long-time foundation members. … I was a founder and an officer of the foundation for 40 to 45 years.”
* Well, yeah, now that he’s been bashed for awkwardly sidestepping a question about Cellini’s intent to vote for him, we finally get an answer out of the guy. As several commenters noted yesterday, he should’ve been prepared to deal with that question. He obviously wasn’t.
23 Comments
|
The business of Illinois
Thursday, Apr 10, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* “Quit your job or lose your baby,” is what Rosaura Villanueva said a supervisor told her…
After repeatedly unloading trucks, lifting and carrying heavy boxes and packages, Villanueva, who couldn’t afford to quit her job at a shipping company, did lose her unborn child.
* So, Rep. Mary Flowers proposed a bill…
In an expansive rewrite of the state’s Human Rights Act, Flowers sponsored a bill that would make it a civil rights violation if an employer fails to provide “reasonable accommodations” for all working pregnant women, including part-time and full-time employees.
“This would allow any pregnant woman to have the same breaks that a man would have if his back were hurting,” Flowers said. “They’d have the same consideration — nothing special, nothing added.” […]
However, these requests, and those like it, cannot cause “undue hardship” to a company under Flowers’ bill; accommodations cannot be “unreasonably expensive or disruptive” to the business.
* But Jay Shattuck, executive director of the Illinois Chamber of Commerce’s Employment Law Council, is opposed…
He said pregnant women already have protection under state and federal law and that adding more “legalese” would hurt employers, who would see “lawsuits galore” over the broad wording in Flowers’ bill. […]
“The premise of this bill is that employers are bad, evil people: That’s the kind of attitude that drives employers out of the state,” Shattuck said. “This is just another proverbial straw on the camel’s back. It’s one more thing, one more thing, one more thing.”
* Getting tougher on employers in one bill, but going easier on landlords who want to evict tenants in another. Mark Brown writes about a legislator fed up with attempting to evict tenants from a building she owns…
Rep. Monique Davis has fought since 2009 to forestall being evicted from a Chicago Board of Education building she has used rent free as her legislative office for the past 11 years.
But when the shoe is on the other foot, the Chicago Democrat takes a dim view of tenants who she says “game the system” to thwart landlords—such as her—in eviction court.
At Davis’ urging, an Illinois House committee on Wednesday approved a measure she sponsored to make it easier for Cook County landlords to evict problem tenants.
The bill would impose a 45-day limit for the Cook County sheriff to carry out any eviction after a final order from a judge.
If the sheriff fails to complete the eviction in that time period, the landlord would be free to turn the job over to any legally-recognized “peace officer.”
Make sure to go read the whole thing. Great column by Brown.
* In other news, Sen. Biss’ retirement savings bill passed the Senate yesterday…
Illinois senators voted to create a retirement savings plan for many workers who do not have access to a retirement plan where they work.
The Illinois Secure Choice Savings Plan was approved on a 30-22 vote, the bare minimum for it to pass.
Under the plan, workers at companies that have more than 25 employees and that do not offer a retirement plan could participate in the program.
* And a proposal that might sound good on its face could also backfire…
The measure, sponsored by Rep. Mike Smiddy, D-Hillsdale, would forbid state agencies from purchasing or leasing vehicles assembled outside of the United States.
“What this means is that the state of Illinois would have several manufacturers to choose from that employ American workers,” Smiddy said. “We have close to 14 manufacturers that currently assemble vehicles here in the United States.” […]
Ron Ewing, a spokesman for General Motors, said the legislation is misguided. He argued that Canada assembles many GM vehicles that contain union-made parts manufactured in the United States.
“Somewhat ironically, given the genesis of this amendment, it would send a signal that the state of Illinois would rather by a non-union Volkswagen Passat made in Tennessee than a union-made Chevrolet from GM,” he said.
* Meanwhile, Mayor Rahm Emanuel ruled out a city lease tax and a city income tax to fund pension payments…
“The city income tax, office lease [tax are both] non-starters. I’ve addressed what I think is a responsible way to meet a challenge that I want to remind didn’t just creep up on us….Our employees are contributing more. They’re making changes. We’re stepping up in a way that does it in a methodical and systematic way.”
* But Toni Preckwinkle is keeping all options open…
Hoping to ward off another credit rating downgrade, Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle said Wednesday that she will soon present a plan to reform the county’s underfunded pension system.
And she’s leaving the door open to hiking property, sales and other taxes.
When asked repeatedly about the possibility of tax increases, Preckwinkle responded: “We’re looking at all the options. Everything is on the table.”
* Related…
* House calls for student loans to be forgiven in bankruptcy
* George Lucas eyes Chicago for art, ‘Star Wars’ museum
* Sneed: Is Toni testing the waters?
17 Comments
|
Credit Unions – Providing “peace of mind” to their members
Thursday, Apr 10, 2014 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisment.]
During some extremely challenging financial times facing consumers, one bright spot in the financial services arena has been credit unions. Credit Union 1 is a shining example of how one credit union serves its membership through good times and bad. In 1995, Credit Union 1 introduced an “Employee Loan Assistance” program designed to provide payroll gap assistance for its members facing the threat of a missed or delayed paycheck. In June 2007, this program was utilized for the first time to assist state employees that incurred a delayed paycheck due to the Illinois budget crisis that occurred. Most recently, Credit Union 1 offered the program to their members of the Illinois General Assembly and staff to assist during an interruption in the legislative payroll cycle. While fortunately this program has only been needed on a limited basis since its inception, Credit Union 1 members are afforded great comfort and security in knowing that their credit union is there for them whenever the need arises. Credit unions are “People Helping People” — dedicated to serving the needs of their membership as well as providing “peace of mind” that the credit union is always there. And that’s the credit union difference.
Comments Off
|
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
Uber’s lies and deception over the last month are an affront to Representative Zalewski and the entire General Assembly. Uber’s representatives, including their Worldwide Director of Policy, participated in lengthy negotiations. Uber, in writing, requested 13 changes to HB 4075.
All 13 changes have been addressed.
Eight changes were fully accepted.
Four changes were addressed through a part-time / full-time compromise for drivers.
The final change was negotiated by Uber, the Illinois Insurance Association and Illinois Trial Lawyers Association.
We were under the impression from the negotiations that the deal would be acceptable to Uber.
Now Uber is sending out canned, deceitful emails attacking the integrity of Representative Zalewski and the entire General Assembly.
Uber’s email claims are completely false. Their lies add to the cynicism so many Illinoisans already feel.
Don’t let their lies and duplicity kill the great progress in HB 4075.
Support Minimum Statewide standards. Vote yes on HB 4075.
Comments Off
|
Oberweis unveils minimum wage hike plan
Thursday, Apr 10, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Bruce Rauner isn’t the only Republican who’s attempting a post-primary pivot…
State Sen. Jim Oberweis (R-Sugar Grove), who is challenging U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin in the November election, has reversed his stance on the minimum wage, and unveiled his own plan to raise it to $10 per hour over three years for adult workers.
Oberweis opposed President Barack Obama’s plan to raise the national minimum wage to $10.10 per hour — a plan Durbin supports — before the Republican primary last month, but now has proposed a gradual increase in the minimum wage in Illinois.
His proposal would hike the state’s minimum wage for those who are 26 or older from $8.25 per hour to $9 per hour next year, then again to $9.50 per hour in 2016, and $10 per hour in 2017. The minimum wage for workers between the ages of 18 and 26 would stay at the current rate of $8.25 per hour; for those under 18, it would stay at $7.75 per hour.
The proposal would also bar municipalities from increasing local minimum wages above the state wage.
* Sun-Times…
“Some are concerned. Some acknowledge that this is a workable compromise,” the state senator from Sugar Grove said. “I will be working with business leaders and with lawmakers from both sides of the aisle to make a minimum-wage increase possible without the very real economic harm that other minimum-wage proposals could cause.”
In targeting only older workers, Oberweis said he is being sensitive to “the difficulty working men and women face when trying to support their families.”
A Durbin aide condemned Oberweis’ plan because it would relegate a large swath of full-time workers to poverty.
“Sen. Durbin believes that no one who gets up and works hard on a full-time basis should live in poverty, but state Sen. Oberweis clearly disagrees,” Durbin spokesman Ron Holmes said. “The sad reality is that if Sen. Oberweis has his way the folks that are out there on the front lines doing the tough jobs will continue to struggle.”
* From the College Democrats of Illinois…
The College Democrats of Illinois is denouncing Oberweis’ plan as being anti-student and anti-young adult. Many students across the state are already struggling to afford their education and rely on minimum wage jobs to help put themselves through school. Many other young adults are already financially independent long before they turn 26. Oberweis is choosing to oppose student interests, while running against U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) who has spent his career as a continuous supporter of students and those trying to earn a living on minimum wage.
“Oberweis’ plan works against students and young adults across the state of Illinois. In a state with over 80 college campuses, it’s appalling that a candidate for U.S. Senate would introduce minimum wage legislation that leaves out young people,” said Brexton Isaacs, President-elect of the College Democrats of Illinois. “Unlike Jim Oberweis, U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) has continued to support Illinois students and raising the minimum wage for all residence of Illinois, and we are proud to continue to show him our support.”
* There’s been no react from Illinois Review as of yet. You gotta wonder what they think of their current situation. They have a pro-choice gubernatorial candidate and a US Senate candidate pushing for a minimum wage hike. They did, however, link to this story…
Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.), who is leading the Equal Pay Day push by Senate Democrats to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act, pays women on his staff far less than he pays men.
Durbin took to the Senate floor on Tuesday to preach on the importance of passing legislation aimed at solving the gender pay gap.
“How serious is equal pay for equal work to working people across America?” said Durbin, “I think it’s critical.”
The average female salary is $11,505 lower than the average male salary in Durbin’s office, according to an analysis of Senate salary data from fiscal year 2013 that showed that more than two-thirds of Democratic Senate offices pay men more than women.
Four of the five highest paid staffers on Durbin’s staff are men, according to the analysis.
* Other stuff…
* Oberweis likely to leave dairy if he wins Senate seat
* Oberweis, Kaifesh To Speak At Tax Day Tea Party Event
23 Comments
|
No more millionaire’s tax
Thursday, Apr 10, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* As you probably know by now, House Speaker Michael Madigan has withdrawn his idea to slap a three point surcharge on income over a million dollars. SJ-R…
Although Democrats hold 71 seats in the House, not all of them were on board with the amendment. Earlier Wednesday, Rep. Scott Drury, D-Highwood, issued a statement that he would vote “no.”
However, Madigan spokesman Steve Brown laid blame for the amendment’s failure at the door of Republican House members.
“The speaker decided this morning, because the Republicans have opted to protect and prefer the millionaires over schoolchildren in every region of the state, that pretty much brings to an end the effort to pass the millionaires amendment for this cycle,” Brown said. “I’d say an overwhelming number of Democrats are supporting this. The fact you could get zero support from Republicans who are opting to protect the millionaires is what doomed the prospects.”
* Sun-Times…
In a statement, Drury said he was troubled by the “piecemeal approach” being used to address the state’s fiscal woes.
“The proposed tax increase falls far short of addressing the full landscape of budget issues that Illinois currently faces,” Drury said.
[Rep. Jack Franks] expressed similar concerns.
“The addition of a tax on incomes over $1 million, without the planned reduction in baseline rates, and absent reforms to our tax-incentive and corporate tax policies, would simply drive a stake through the heart of our state’s economy, and I cannot support it,” Franks said. “Taking more from taxpayers will simply accelerate our state’s economic decline.”
* More from Franks…
Franks, D-Marengo, said he told Madigan on Monday that he could not in good conscience support the amendment to impose a 3 percent tax on annual incomes greater than $1 million. He went public with the decision shortly after Rep. Scott Drury, D-Highwood, did the same.
Franks had told the Northwest Herald in a March 21 interview that he was open to putting it on the ballot to let voters decide. But on Wednesday he cited Gov. Pat Quinn’s budget address five days later, in which Quinn asked to make the temporary 67 percent tax increase permanent, as one of the catalysts to make him change his mind.
“With Governor Quinn, there’s no taxation without misrepresentation,” Franks said. “When [the millionaire tax] was presented initially, it was before the governor made clear his intention to make the tax hike permanent, or to create a property tax rebate that would in fact cost McHenry County families more.”
But he also said he told Madigan that he felt the amendment was too much a political move. While Madigan said the tax would generate at least $1 billion a year for public education, critics called it a political move aimed at Republican gubernatorial candidate and self-made multimillionaire Bruce Rauner,
Franks said he had heard the same concern from his constituents.
“I think people felt, like I did, that it was a political maneuver done to help a flailing governor,” Franks said.
When asked how Madigan took it, Franks answered, “Not well.”
* Statement from House GOP Leader Jim Durkin…
“I find the announcement by the Speaker’s office a bit confusing. Speaker Madigan holds the 71 votes required to pass his constitutional amendment, apparently support from his own members fell short. There is clearly a bi-partisan coalition that knows we can’t tax our way to prosperity and job creation. His amendment offered no help to the nearly 570,000 unemployed Illinoisans looking for a job. It’s my hope the coalition can defeat the onslaught of job crushing proposals such as a graduated tax and the permanency of the ‘temporary’ income tax on families and employers. Republicans will continue to stand up for the taxpayers of Illinois.”
* Statement from Senate GOP Leader Christine Radogno…
“The Democrat majorities and their partner Gov. Quinn always try to blame someone and something else for their record high taxes, record high unemployment and record high government spending in Illinois.
“We are relieved this tax increase that would cost families and jobs has been beaten back. But now we must continue the fight against more Democrat tax increases on families and the businesses that put them to work. The Democrat majorities are still planning an assault on taxpayers that will make their temporary income tax increase permanent, create a tax structure that raises taxes on middle income families, tax soda and raise fees on job creators. That is always their ill-conceived solution to the problems they created in the state.”
* From Americans for Prosperity Illinois…
In a victory for working families and businesses through the state, the so-called ‘millionaire tax’ has been declared dead by Speaker Madigan’s spokesman as Democratic Reps. Scott Drury and Jack Franks declared their opposition to the tax hike.
When Speaker Madigan proposed the ‘millionaire tax’ last month, Americans for Prosperity-Illinois quickly launched a campaign against the tax by airing cable TV and online ads, generating hundreds of constituent calls to priority legislators’ offices, mobilizing activists throughout districts and other grassroots activities to give voice to thousands of Illinoisans who oppose increased taxes.
“Rep. Drury and Rep. Franks should be commended for siding with taxpayers and small businesses by taking a courageous stand against this proposal,” said AFP Illinois State Director David From. “Illinois resident aren’t fooled by the false promises of Springfield politicians, and through this effort they communicated directly with legislators in their district.”
Discuss.
52 Comments
|
* Tribune…
An investigation by the Illinois legislative inspector general into allegations of political pressure at Metra found that House Speaker Michael Madigan did not violate the state’s ethics act, Madigan’s office said today.
Heather Wier Vaught, the ethics officer for the House Democratic Caucus, said she received word that Legislative Inspector General Tom Homer found no violation of any law and has concluded his investigation. […]
Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said the speaker asked Homer to look into the matter over the summer and participated in Homer’s inquiry.
“The conclusion was there was no wrongdoing” by “everybody who looked at the facts,” Brown said.
* But Tom Homer sent a statement to reporters which included these remarks…
A decision to close an investigation based on insufficient evidence does not constitute a good housekeeping seal of approval or a best practices award.
Moreover, closure does not bar the Inspector General from resuming the investigation if circumstances warrant.
Hmm.
19 Comments
|
*** UPDATE *** Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia finally issued a real apology on the House floor today for her racial remarks from yesterday. Watch it…
Leader Durkin accepted the apology. Make sure to watch that, too.
[ *** End Of Update *** ]
* Yesterday, as you’ll recall, I told you that Democratic state Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia said this during a debate on a charter school bill…
“So, listen to me minorities,” she said turning toward the Democratic side of the chamber. “I’m over here because we’re all over on this side, right?”
The Republicans erupted. They have an African-American member, Rep. John Anthony.
Responding to the HGOP outburst, Chapa LaVia said, “Wait,” and then, pointing her finger at the other side of the aisle, said “We have a half. We have a half.”
* This is how Rep. Chapa LaVia explained herself to the Aurora Beacon News…
“The comments were taken out of context. It’s extremely frustrating,” Chapa LaVia said.
By “we have a half,” Chapa LaVia said she was imploring Republican representatives to “let (her) talk to this (Democratic) half (of the floor),” she said.
“Afterward, I apologized and there were no hard feelings,” Chapa LaVia said from Springfield.
“I apologized from the bottom of my heart. You know I’m not that type of person,” Chapa LaVia said to lawmakers from the House floor.
Taken out of context? Um, no.
And she just wanted to talk to her half of the floor? If that’s all she meant, then why even apologize?
And what was the reason she said “we’re all over here” when talking about minorities?
Ugh.
71 Comments
|
*** UPDATED x1 *** The rest of the story
Thursday, Apr 10, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From Illinois Watchdog…
The Illinois House has approved a three-year ban on virtual charter schools, the moratorium coming shortly after a one-year ban expired.
“It’s an amazing story about what they want to do here in Illinois. We are going absolutely backward in terms of education reform and education innovation,” said Ted Dabrowski, vice president of policy at the Illinois Policy Institute.
Much of the political pressure for the ban came from teachers unions, Dabrowski said.
“The school districts in Illinois have massive power. We have 868 school districts, the most in the nation, and they have massive power to keep out charter schools. They want to keep out competition, and so the unions and a couple of the legislators…have worked very hard to block reforms,” Dabrowski said. “There’s a lot of politics as usual.”
* But Dabrowski isn’t just on the Illinois Policy Institute’s payroll. From a June, 2013 Daily Herald story…
A controversial push to open the Illinois Virtual Charter School at Fox River Valley in August ended during Tuesday’s state charter school commission meeting, barely 24 hours after the applicants withdrew their pending appeals in a surprise change of course.
School boards in 18 districts from Algonquin to Plainfield refused to grant a charter to Virtual Learning Solutions, a fledgling nonprofit that formed last winter to apply for the school. The applicants appealed to the state commission for a second opinion, launching a process that was expected to wrap up in late July after public hearings and interviews by commissioners.
Then, on May 24, Gov. Pat Quinn approved a one-year moratorium on the establishment of new virtual charter schools, throwing the appeal process into limbo. […]
Ted Dabrowski, a Wilmette resident who works as vice president of policy at the Illinois Policy Institute, took over as president of Virtual Learning Solutions when Sharnell Jackson resigned the week the moratorium became law. He said Monday it was “obvious” the one-year moratorium required his group’s project be put on hold.
Dabrowski had served as the company’s treasurer before taking over as president.
*** UPDATE *** A peevish response from the Illinois Policy Institute…
Rich,
Do you even care about facts? Ted is a VOLUNTEER at that school, no comp, only gives his time because he cares about educating kids who are under served by the traditional system.
You are wrongly feeding the union backed narrative that something is going on that is not. What is going on is the public system continues to fail the poor and minorities and it is the unions that are preventing choices that help the very people they lock into the failing system.
Helping to inaccurately disparage good people who volunteer their time, whether you agree with their policies or not, is appalling. The school is a non profit, and Ted is a volunteer board member. You should have pointed that out, he has no financial interest in that charter or the expansion of charters. To say or imply otherwise is to mislead your readers. Meanwhile, the unions DO have a financial interest, as do local school boards, in blocking charters that would help children.
What a sad commentary.
John
–
John Tillman
CEO
Illinois Policy Institute
Illinois Policy Action
31 Comments
|
Comments Off
|
Comments Off
|
Question of the day
Wednesday, Apr 9, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Bruce Rauner spoke to the Illinois Bankers Association today…
* The Question: Caption?
As always, keep it clean.
102 Comments
|
*** UPDATED x1 *** “We have a half”
Wednesday, Apr 9, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* During today’s debate on a bill to do away with a state commission which can overturn local school board decisions on charter schools, sponsoring Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia was trying to make a point about minority parents.
“So, listen to me minorities,” she said turning toward the Democratic side of the chamber. “I’m over here because we’re all over on this side, right?”
The Republicans erupted. They have an African-American member, Rep. John Anthony.
Responding to the HGOP outburst, Chapa LaVia said, “Wait,” and then, pointing her finger at the other side of the aisle, said “We have a half. We have a half.”
What. The. Heck. Was. That?
Oy.
* Watch…
That’s just awful.
Yes, the debate was contentious. But nothing justifies stuff like that. Ever.
* The Republicans rose to object strongly, as they rightly should have done. I’ll see if I can get video later. Chapa LaVia gave one of those “I apologize if anyone was offended” apologies.
Not enough, Representative. Not nearly enough.
* By the way, the bill failed to achieve a majority. It was put on postponed consideration.
*** UPDATE *** Rep. Reboletti demands an apology…
* The apology..
106 Comments
|
A whole lot of progress on ride sharing
Wednesday, Apr 9, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The taxi companies have backed way off their outlandish legislative push to all but outlaw ride sharing companies like Uber and Lyft. There is no final agreement yet, however. Word is that insurance details are still to be worked out, but here’s the press release from Rep. Mike Zalewski outlining what’s been put into a bill and will be heard tomorrow…
Local governments can regulate ride-sharing services more strictly than the new state standards, except for chauffeur license requirements and establishing fares
A two-tiered regulation system is provided for ride-sharing systems – for drivers/vehicles participating more than 18 hours per week and those doing it 18 or fewer hours a week
Regulation for more than 18 hours per week
Drivers must secure a chauffeur’s license from the local government where the vehicle is registered or where the ride-sharing arrangement is conducted
Vehicles must have distinctive registration plates to designate them as ride-sharing participants
Vehicle age must be the same as local government requirements for other vehicles transporting passengers commercially
Vehicles must pass the same inspections local governments require of other vehicles transporting passengers commercially
Regulation for 18 or fewer hours per week
Drivers do not need a chauffeur’s license
Dispatchers must conduct background checks on prospective drivers and certify they fall under the 18-hour threshold
No distinctive registration plates are required
Dispatchers must certify that vehicles have passed an annual safety inspection before it can be used in ride-sharing
An IDFPR state commercial ride-sharing dispatcher’s license is required, with annual renewals
Dispatchers must have commercial liability insurance with primary coverage for the dispatcher, driver and vehicle
Ride-sharing arrangements cannot be done by “hailing,” hand gestures or verbal statements
Ride-sharing cannot be done at designated taxi stands, queues or loading zones, nor at any place banned by local governments
Ride-sharing drivers must follow all rules a local government has for licensed chauffeurs for servicing under-served areas and providing wheelchair accessible vehicles
Dispatches can only be made to properly licensed drivers and vehicles that have distinctive registration plates
Violations of ride-sharing requirements are subject to penalties under IDFPR
Anyone injured or in danger of being injured from an actual or imminent violation of this new law can sue in circuit court
Allow taxis to establish a system for “surge pricing” in situations where rider demand is high, as long as the service is contacted by an Internet or smartphone device and drivers clearly agree to higher prices for using the service
Dispatchers must collect records on all commercial ride-sharing vehicles
IDFPR must adopt rules to implement the provisions in this proposed law
All the truly goofy over the top stuff is gone. That’s a good thing.
I also like the idea of taxi companies getting into the online ride share business. It’ll help spur even more competition and force the companies to improve their service.
* Meanwhile, Mayor Emanuel is also continuing to work on a compromise…
Emanuel is still refusing to regulate ride-sharing fares for fear of snuffing out a burgeoning industry on the cutting edge of technology that gives Chicagoans more transportation options.
But he’s reserving the right to “place a cap on surge pricing” during periods of peak demand if increased disclosure requirements fail to “alleviate consumer complaints.”
In the meantime, ride-sharing companies would be required to “publicly announce” when surge pricing periods are in effect and “take steps to ensure that customers clearly agree” to those higher prices. That includes providing customers with a “true fare quote in dollars and cents” instead of a multiplier.
4 Comments
|
Correlation or causation?
Wednesday, Apr 9, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* There are two premises for this Chicago Reader article. The most important…
On March 5 the City Council voted 46-3 to approve Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s proposal to spend $55 million in property taxes on a new Marriott hotel in the South Loop—part of his ambitious development plan that also features a basketball arena for DePaul University.
The vote followed a September decision by the Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority, a state-city entity, to award Marriott the coveted contract to run the new hotel. […]
However, what the mayor and his aides didn’t mention—and what has gone unreported until now—is that in the year leading up to the lucrative deal for Marriott, the hedge fund of one of Emanuel’s largest campaign contributors bought millions of shares of stock in the hotel chain.
That hedge fund, Citadel LLC, is run by billionaire Kenneth Griffin, whom Forbes last fall deemed the wealthiest man in Illinois. He is famous in the financial world for making a killing in high-frequency trading. […]
According to SEC filings, the firm began buying major portions of Marriott stock in late 2012. By September 2013, SEC filings showed the hedge fund owned 2.3 million shares of Marriott. As of the last SEC filings at the end of 2013, Citadel owned roughly 1.6 million shares of Marriott stock worth an estimated $89 million.
I dunno. Was this whole thing really greased a year in advance? There was, after all, a bidding battle and Mariott in the end wound up beating Hilton for the project…
The board of the Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority approved the 10-year contract for hotel operations. Its net value to Marriott, in today’s dollars, is $13.6 million over the life of the deal, according to a spokeswoman for the authority, the state-city agency known as McPier. […]
Marriott’s proposal beat out one by Hilton Worldwide, the other finalist. That deal would have netted Hilton an estimated $15.8 million, McPier officials said.
* And after ten years, McPier will own the hotel…
The $400 million hotel is part of a larger project that will include a multiuse arena that will host DePaul University basketball and a 500-room boutique hotel.
Ultimately, the authority will own the larger convention hotel, financing its construction with bonds backed by hotel revenues.
* Perhaps these stock purchases were just a good investment by Citadel.
As noted above, Citadel sold quite a bit of its stock, but that’s probably because the price has been skyrocketing since last fall. I doubt that increase has a whole lot to do with the Chicago deal.
And revenues are skyrocketing at the company. Take a look at Marriott’s 2013 annual report…
We added 161 properties (25,420 rooms) and 51 properties (10,299 rooms) exited our system in 2013. These figures do not include residential units. During 2013, we also added five residential properties (301 units) and no residential properties or units exited the system.
Total segment financial results increased by $24 million to $1,197 million in 2013 from $1,173 million in 2012, and total segment revenues increased by $992 million to $12,518 million in 2013, a 9 percent increase from revenues of $11,526 million in 2012
While the 1,200 room hotel will be pretty sweet, it’s less than five percent of the total gross rooms added by the company last year alone.
However, taxpayers will pay to build the hotel, bumping up its margins. And a casino could also be built down the street. That wouldn’t be bad, either. It’s a very good deal for Marriott, without a doubt. Courtesy of taxpayers. Hooray!
* Which brings us to the second premise, which is pretty funny…
In speeches and interviews Griffin has lashed out at business executives who put the needs of their companies over Illinois while accepting tax breaks and public subsidies.
“Government being involved in picking winners and losers invariably leads to a loss of economic freedom and encourages corruption,” he told the Tribune last year.
Yet the taxpayer-financed Marriott project is very much a governmentally engineered deal, siphoning public resources into a tax increment financing scheme that will underwrite a private hotel chain.
Yep. But, then again, he’s a stockholder, not a company executive.
…Adding… From Citadel…
“The Reader story is completely irresponsible. It is comprised of nearly equal parts baseless speculation devoid of any real factual grounding and preposterous conclusions.”
20 Comments
|
Today’s number: $1.5 million in RGA cash
Wednesday, Apr 9, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From yesterday’s twitters…
* Sun-Times…
For the second consecutive month, the Republican Governors Association plowed $750,000 into Bruce Rauner’s gubernatorial bid, for a total of $1.5 million since the political newcomer clinched the GOP nomination in March.
It’s a sign that there will be no shortage of resources in this gubernatorial race. The RGA was a major player in 2010 and will be again — despite Rauner’s own resources. Rauner, a multi-millionaire, has put $6 million into his own campaign. He far outraised — and outspent — his three opponents in the primary. The Democratic Governors Association is sure to be a major player as well in its efforts to back Gov. Pat Quinn’s reelection.
Hours after Rauner’s victory in March, the RGA wired over a $750,000 donation to Rauner, who has already aired two TV ads, one in Spanish and one elevating his wife, Diana Rauner.
The Tribune’s campaign contribution Twitter feed is really helpful, which is why it’s featured here on the blog. There are days when campaign nuts are just focusing solely on that particular box in our center column. I love it.
11 Comments
|
“Worst public policy in Illinois history”
Wednesday, Apr 9, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Bob Grey is the president of the Citizens Club of Springfield and sits on the city’s Citizens’ Efficiency Commission. He sent this out today…
An initial finding of the [Citizens’ Efficiency Commission] was the discovery of a 2% tax on out-of-state companies selling fire insurance in Illinois.
This Foreign Fire Insurance Fund, which the state does not call a tax and does not collect, generates dollars that the Illinois Municipal League collects for downstate fire departments and distributes (after taking several thousands in fees) directly to a committee of firemen with no oversight, review or accountability by any public officials.
The [Springfield Fire Department] ’slush fund’ totaled about $1 M over the past 4 years. This would rank with the worst public policy in Illinois history.
* That’s definitely a biased interpretation. But what is the Foreign Fire Insurance tax? The Municipal League explains on its website…
The Illinois Foreign Fire Insurance Fund is distributed by the state of Illinois Muncipal League. The Municipal League collects insurance taxes from companies outside of the State of Illinois. Those funds are distributed to fire departments across the state to provide for the needs of the departments as the department sees fit to compensate for what is not provided by the municipality.
* The firefighters are trying to shed some light on how much is distributed to municipalities each year and how much the Illinois Municipal League’s cut really is, so they have a bill…
Any entity that maintains a website and that is charged with the collection of a tax or license fee and the rendering of the tax or license fee to the treasurer of the foreign fire insurance board or fire protection district secretary must publish to its website by the first day of August of each year the following information for the year ending on the preceding first day of July:
(1) the total amount of the tax or license fee collected on behalf of each municipal fire department or fire protection district;
(2) the total administrative fees, if any, charged to each municipal fire department or fire protection district;
(3) the aggregate amount of taxes or license fees collected on behalf of all municipal fire departments or fire protection districts; and
(4) the aggregate amount of administrative fees, if any, charged to each municipal fire department or fire protection district.
The bill hasn’t moved yet, but it may advance later in the session.
21 Comments
|
Major school funding overhaul advances
Wednesday, Apr 9, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* AP…
A proposal to dramatically overhaul the state’s school funding formula and allocate more money to poorer districts moved ahead in the Illinois Senate on Tuesday. The regionally divisive issue, however, likely faces a tough road in gaining support from both parties in both chambers. […]
After a nearly three-hour subcommittee debate, the issue was sent by a party line vote to another Senate committee, where it must be approved before it can advance to the chamber floor.
Under the plan, 92 percent of total state education funding would be distributed by factoring in districts’ poverty levels, accounting for low-income students using a weighted formula. The legislation also uses the number of students receiving free and reduced-priced lunches to determine who qualifies for additional low income dollars, which Manar says is in practice with most other states.
Only specialized programs for special education and early childhood education would be exempted from the formula. And, for the first time in decades, funding for Chicago Public Schools would be treated under the same formula as the rest of the state.
* Republicans have so far been against the proposal…
Sen. David Luechtefeld, R-Okawville, served as co-chair with Manar on the education funding committee and agrees with the bill’s concept of a single formula that would fund schools more equitably. But he believes Manar’s proposal goes too far and said “it’s debatable whether we should put over 90 percent into the formula.”
Luechtefeld pointed out that some expenditures, such as transportation, are based on factors other than a district’s need.
* Not having numbers is a problem, for sure…
[Sen. Matt Murphy (R-Palatine)] agreed that the system used to fund schools needs to be fixed, but questioned the wisdom of acting on a proposal when school administrators and lawmakers alike don’t know how the proposed overhaul would affect funding levels of individual districts.
“How do we know that this formula in this bill will work better than the current one if we have no idea how it’s going to work because we haven’t run the numbers?” Murphy said. “Why can’t we run the numbers and find out?”
Illinois State Board of Education legislative liaison Amanda Elliot said the agency is working on compiling that data, but cautioned that the figures span “multiple divisions.” According to ISBE public information director Matt Vanover, it could be at least a month before the numbers are available.
“We’re looking at having (the data) by mid-May,” he said.
David Lett, superintendent of Unit 8 schools in Pana, told the subcommittee he’s run some of the numbers internally on his own to see whether his ailing district would see relief under the proposed new formula and found they would do better than they do currently.
* But having numbers could also be a big problem…
[Bloom Township Schools Treasurer Rob Grossi] said districts like D.167, which receives nearly a third of its funding from the state, are at the mercy of state government financial woes. More wealthy districts that take in more in property taxes and need less state money can weather the fiscal problems in Springfield easier, Grossi said. Most districts in Cook County have low property tax values per pupil.
Once the calculations are done for individual school districts, it will be difficult for senators and representatives of districts who will lose funding to vote for the bill, Grossi said.
“The changes in this bill are so significant that it changes the entire model (for education spending),” Grossi said Tuesday. “Once the numbers determine the winners and losers, it will be hard for some of them to support it.”
6 Comments
|
* The House overwhelmingly passed House Speaker Michael Madigan’s proposal to prohibit voter discrimination…
House Speaker Michael Madigan’s proposed constitutional amendment, which would be placed on the Nov. 4 ballot, says no person should be denied registration and voting rights based on race, color, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, language or income.
The House sent the measure to the Senate on a 109-5 vote.
The measure seeks to counter a June 2013 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that dislodged part of the 1960s-era federal Voting Rights Act and prompted eight states to attempt to restrict access to polling booths, Madigan said.
”That has brought on legislation in other states that some of us would consider voter suppression,” Madigan said, pointing to how voter photo identification laws have disproportionately impacted minorities and the poor.
* This argument against the idea was totally bogus…
State Rep. David Reis, R-Willow Hill, voiced concern that the push by Madigan was merely an attempt to short-circuit a move by GOP gubernatorial nominee Bruce Rauner to get his signature-driven, term-limits constitutional amendment on the fall ballot.
Some commenters have also repeatedly brought up this issue even though I’ve pointed out to them that they’re wrong. Nowhere in the Illinois Constitution are there limits to the number of popular initiatives. Legislative initiatives are limited…
The General Assembly shall not submit proposed amendments to more than three Articles of the Constitution at any one election.
But that has zero impact on how many popular initiatives can be submitted to voters.
* Anyway, back to the debate…
“The intent of this constitutional amendment is to provide in Illinois, constitutionally, that voter-suppression laws would not be permitted,” said Madigan, D-Chicago. “Some might say, ‘Well, today in Illinois, you don’t need this. Voter suppression wouldn’t happen in Illinois.’
“We don’t know that,” Madigan continued. “We don’t know what the future holds. What we do know is we can constitutionalize the protection of the right to vote.” […]
Reis, who voted against Madigan’s plan, also said there is no evidence Illinois is currently engaging in any form of voter suppression.
“This is a constitutional amendment in search of a problem,” Reis said.
On that point, Rep. Reis is probably more accurate.
* AP…
Jim Durkin told The Associated Press on Tuesday the state party has “had an identity crisis for many years now.” He said he believes it’s important for people to know Republicans believe Illinois residents who are citizens should not denied the right to vote.
“Republicans, we’re going to win with addition,” Durkin said. “We need to dispel some of the notions that have been hanging over the GOP for years, that we’re a party of white suburban men. For me this was an easy decision.”
Discuss.
30 Comments
|
Rahm’s self-made rough road
Wednesday, Apr 9, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Gov. Pat Quinn isn’t at all pleased with the way Mayor Rahm Emanuel handled the pension reform bill…
Quinn chided Emanuel Tuesday for not consulting with him before proposing the pension reform plan, which would have hiked Chicago property taxes.
And he said the mayor and his allies apparently “got the message” about his concerns.
“I learned about this kind of after the fact,” Quinn said of the original proposal. “I think collaboration is always a good way to go in life – whether in politics, government or getting along with people. It’s always good to touch base with as many people as you can.”
* And that silly idea last week to insert language into the bill requiring the Chicago City Council to raise property taxes is still a very big problem…
Even though Madigan moved Monday to remove language authorizing the City Council to impose that property-tax hike, some Republicans still voiced worries that the legislation being voted on amounted to a huge new property-tax burden on city taxpayers.
“Let’s not kid anybody. What we’re talking about today is a massive property-tax increase,” said Rep. David McSweeney, R-Barrington Hills. “This is not a comprehensive solution.” […]
The legislation is deeply steeped in the gubernatorial campaign, where Republican Bruce Rauner shares McSweeney’s stance and has called for the legislation to move city employees into a 401(k)-style retirement program and eliminate future pension benefits.
* And why did the mayor even bother putting this thing in?…
Removed from the bill Tuesday was a provision some unions balked at that would have dissolved the municipal and laborers funds and replaced them “as provided by the General Assembly” with recommendations made by the city.
Madigan Spokesman Steve Brown said that provision was added “because the mayor’s office thought that was a component.” The Emanuel administration had no comment.
Keep in mind that Madigan didn’t write the bill or the amendments. Rahm did. This is on him.
* OK, so he passed the bill anyway. But this was the “easy” one. Teachers, coppers and, most importantly, firefighters are next on the list. They will be far more difficult to negotiate with and/or steamroll. He can’t keep making these easily avoidable mistakes. He has to start including more people in his discussion, including the governor and the minority leaders.
The General Assembly ain’t the city council.
* Roundup…
* CTU chief hits pension bill as ‘theft,’ calls for Quinn veto
* Illinois Legislature Passes Emanuel’s Pension Bill
* Mayor Emanuel’s pension fix passes Illinois House and Senate (with rollcalls)
* Chicago pension overhaul OK’d by House, Senate
* House, Senate pass Rahm’s pension bill — now it’s up to Quinn
* Pension reform bill passes Springfield with some GOP support: During debate, House Republican leader Jim Durkin was statesmanlike. “I want to make sure that we do the best we can to ensure that the City of Chicago will be vibrant, that it will be a place where we will feel safe and secure about sending out children, encouraging our international friends and our friends from out of the state to come visit, spend your money in the City of Chicago,” Durkin said. “Everyone in this chamber, we spend time in the City of Chicago. They’ve got a hospitality industry that is better than anywhere else in the United States. It’s a jewel. But I don’t want to see the City of Chicago fall in line with Detroit.”
13 Comments
|
Today’s quote
Wednesday, Apr 9, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From the SJ-R’s story on Bruce Rauner’s Springfield visit…
Asked by a reporter why he has not seemed to use the phrase “government union bosses,” which he often mentioned in the primary campaign, after he won the nomination, Rauner said he is “very pro-worker.”
“I’m not anti-union at all,” he said. “Unions to me are fine if you want to join ’em or not join ’em. That’s not the issue. Conflict of interest inside the government is. I don’t like folks who are in contract negotiations using political cash from taxpayers to influence politicians. That I’m against.”
He also said he wanted people in Springfield to know he doesn’t want to take away pension benefits already earned.
“I’m the one person in this race who doesn’t want to modify” pensions already earned, he said. “I want to freeze the current pension system … and for future work, create a second pension system that’s a defined contribution plan, more of a 401k-style plan.
OK, first of all, he totally sidestepped the question.
Secondly, ““Unions to me are fine if you want to join ’em or not join ’em” is a major rhetorical twist, since he wants counties to be able to institute their own so-called “right to work” ordinances.
And lastly, he most certainly does want to “take away pension benefits already earned.” Rauner would freeze all pension benefit payments forever. No protection at all from inflation. Period. That’s far harsher than anything else on the table.
40 Comments
|
* Bill Cellini attended Bruce Rauner’s Sangamon County Republican event last night…
“The first time I heard him tonight,” Cellini said when asked his thoughts about Rauner so far in the governor’s race and whether he was supporting him. “He was very impressive.”
“I’ve been a Republican all my life, and he’s the Republican candidate,” Cellini said of Rauner. […]
When told that Cellini described him as “very impressive,” Rauner sidestepped a question about whether he welcomed an endorsement from Cellini, who sat near the front of the room during one of Rauner’s two speeches.
“I don’t know,” Rauner answered. “I didn’t even know he was here. I don’t really know him. I can’t comment on that.”
* Gov. Quinn’s campaign e-mailed this hyperbolic missive today…
As first reported by the Chicago Sun-Times, while in Springfield last night Billionaire Bruce Rauner met up with infamous corrupt insider Bill Cellini, who proceeded to endorse Rauner. Instead of immediately renouncing Cellini, a convicted felon, Rauner told the Chicago Sun-Times he “couldn’t comment on that.”
One of the most powerful insiders in Springfield, King of Clout Bill Cellini was caught in an extortion plot to shake down Oscar-winning producer and investment mogul Thomas Rosenberg for a major campaign contribution. Cellini was released from federal prison last November for his role in the political fundraising scheme.
“Clearly Billionaire Bruce Rauner is afraid to alienate the King of Clout,” said Quinn for Illinois Deputy Press Secretary Izabela Miltko. “Mr. Rauner claims to want to root out corruption and ‘shake up Springfield,’ yet when faced with an endorsement from the King of Shakedowns, mum’s the word.
“Instead of saying no to the King of Clout, Mr. Rauner said he ‘can’t comment on that’ – and that’s the real Bruce Rauner.”
This is not the first time Rauner has partnered with corrupt insiders who have conspired to cheat taxpayers, in order to gain political support. Currently imprisoned Stuart Levine – whom Cellini conspired with in the shake down scandal – was making $25,000 a month on Rauner’s payroll while sitting on the board of the Teachers Retirement System and voting to give Rauner’s investment firm GTCR a $50 million contract to manage it. Rauner failed to disclose the conflict of interest and still hasn’t returned the hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees he collected from the deal.
When he served as state treasurer, Governor Quinn took on Cellini on behalf of Illinois taxpayers regarding the financing of the Abraham Lincoln Hotel.
Rauner didn’t “meet up” with Cellini. C’mon, already.
But Rauner’s refusal to reject the “endorsement” does show his inexperience on the campaign trail. This ain’t the primary, Bruce. Up your game.
*** UPDATE 1 *** Cellini and Kjellander? John Kass’ head might very well explode…
Bob Kjellander of Springfield, a former member of the Republican National Committee, said after participating in a small-group discussion with Rauner that the candidate “did an outstanding job. He said Rauner is picking up support with African-American ministers, and there will be “some major Hispanic players in the city of Chicago as well.”
*** UPDATE 2 *** From the Rauner campaign…
Bruce is running against the corrupt, insider ways of doing things in Springfield and obviously renounces Cellini.
While you can’t control who endorses you, you can control who you endorse - and that’s why Pat Quinn is making another ridiculous attack. Pat knew about Rod Blagojevich’s corrupt dealings and vouched for him anyway, calling Blago ‘honest’ and ‘ethical’ and someone who ‘always does the right thing.’
This is the biggest lie yet from Quinnocchio. Quinn should have resigned and helped expose Blagojevich, instead Quinn stood by him.
54 Comments
|
A city lease tax?
Wednesday, Apr 9, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Sneed has the scoop…
Sneed hears rumbles that a City Council proposal to levy a lease tax on office buildings may be in the mix of suggestions to restore two of the city’s pension funds to fiscal health. […]
“The downtown real estate interests lobbied long and hard against it and won [during the Jane Byrne years], but it could bring in tens of millions of dollars to offset the upcoming $600 million bill to stabilize police and fire pension funds, which don’t have enough assets to cover their liabilities,” the source added.
Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s pitch for a City Council ordinance to levy an additional $250 million in property taxes is going to be a tough vote with anticipated artillery pointed at Emanuel by Aldermen Bob Fioretti (2nd), Scott Waguespack (32nd) and Brendan Reilly (42nd).
“The mayor needs to get the tax to solve the city’s fiscal problems off the back of property owners and figure out a mix of non-property tax revenue sources to get this ordinance passed,” the source said.
* I kinda doubt that this idea will bear much fruit…
The governor acknowledged the need for additional revenue to bolster the city’s pension system. But the kind of revenue Quinn discussed Tuesday may not be music to Emanuel’s ears.
“I think it should be a focus on the tax code and giving a full review of all these loopholes,” Quinn said, while declining to offer specifics. “I said yesterday, very clearly, we need to relieve the property tax burden, and I’m committed to that.”
The Tribune’s article called the idea “an old standby that has failed to get traction.” Correct.
9 Comments
|
About those property taxes
Wednesday, Apr 9, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Greg Hinz wrote this before the Senate voted on the city’s pension reform bill. Only one Senate Republican voted for the measure…
Why are the Senate Rs balking when half of the House Rs voted yes? As answered by Sen. Matt Murphy, who usually speaks for Senate Rs on budget and financial matters, they want to see what else Mr. Emanuel will be asking for when he comes back with deals covering police, firefighters and city teachers. And they want to know if the state will have to pony up then.
“If we’re going to be partners in the process, If would make some sense to cut us in on the whole,” Mr. Murphy said.
Particularly sticking in the Senate R’s craw is Mr. Quinn’s budget proposal to send every home owner a $500 property-tax refund. That would help city taxpayers more than suburban ones, Mr. Murphy said, since suburban home values are higher. “So it looks like we’re pouring money into Chicago just at the time when Chicago’s talking about raising property taxes.”
* Murphy does have a point. This graphic produced by the Sun-Times compares city property taxes to some Cook County suburban taxes…
They could’ve looked at the south suburbs and seen even more of a discrepancy, or even Downstate, where property taxes are almost twice as high.
* To the article…
Emanuel aides say the plan would cost the owner of a $250,000 home an additional $58 a year on top of a $4,000 property tax bill for each of the next five years. That works out to $290 per homeowner, to raise a total of $250 million.
Those numbers may prove dramatically low, as some suggest. But Ameya Pawar, the first-term alderman who represents Emanuel’s home 47th Ward, says he’s ready to support a tax increase.
“I will take the tough vote,” he said Tuesday. “I understood when I ran that this term was going to be about pensions. But at some point Chicago has to think about K-12 education.”
Pawar said many homeowners move from his ward to the suburbs when their children are on the cusp of going to high school, unless the kids test into the best public high schools. He says they often tell him, “I’m willing to pay more taxes if you’re willing to give us some stability and equity” in the Chicago Public Schools system.
“The taxes where they move to are higher, but let’s not forget what they get in the suburbs — a complete K-12 system,” Pawar says.
36 Comments
|
Quinn, Rauner to share the same IEA stage
Wednesday, Apr 9, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From the Illinois Education Association…
Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn and businessman Bruce Rauner, his opponent in the November election for governor, will make their first joint appearance on Friday, April 11th, at the Illinois Education Association’s (IEA) 160th Representative Assembly (RA) and Annual Meeting in Chicago.
The two have accepted the union’s invitation to sit together and answer education policy questions posed by IEA President Cinda Klickna in front of the more than 1,200 teachers, education support professionals, higher education faculty and staff and retired educators who make up the delegation for the meeting.
The union did the same thing four years ago. I’ll see if we can get a live video feed out of there. Should be fascinating.
* Sun-Times…
“I don’t know if Bruce Rauner is really willing to sit and talk with me or talk with our unions,” [IEA President Cinda Klickna] said in March. “This campaign has characterized me in a way that I never characterized myself nor do our members. I guess we’ll just have to see.”
32 Comments
|
Comments Off
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|