Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
Rate the tourism ad

Thursday, Oct 3, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* AdWeek

You have to hand it to the Illinois Office of Tourism and JWT Chicago. They’re not being overly precious with the image of Abraham Lincoln.

The Land of Lincoln rolled out a new tourism spot this fall starring “Mini Abe,” a tiny plastic version of the 16th president who is seen grunting, groaning and shrieking his way around the state—enjoying everything it has to offer, from riverboats and county fairs to the Willis Tower and Route 66.

“Be more spontaneous this fall,” says the on-screen copy line at the end, along with the enjoyIllinois.com URL and #MiniAbe hashtag.
The humor is undeniably odd, but it may be working. A spokeswoman for the tourism office tells the Chicago Business Journal that tourism inquiries made through enjoyIllinois.com are up 57 percent over a year ago.

* The ad

It made me chuckle. You?

  32 Comments      


US Supremes take Illinois unionization case

Thursday, Oct 3, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* The US Supreme Court agreed to hear an Illinois government-related case this week that went mostly unnoticed in the Illinois media. From Jurist.org

In Harris v. Quinn [docket; cert. petition, PDF] the court will determine whether a state can “compel personal care providers to accept and financially support a private organization as their exclusive representative to petition the state for greater reimbursements from its Medicaid programs.”

The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held [opinion] that “a collective bargaining agreement that requires Medicaid home-care personal assistants to pay a fee to a union representative [does not] violate the First Amendment.” The court also ruled, “we lack jurisdiction to consider the claims of plaintiffs who have opted not to be in the union. Because they are not presently subject to mandatory fair share fees, their claims are not ripe.”

* This is from the Pacific Legal Foundation’s blog

An Illinois executive order and law declares all personal home assistants to be public employees, for the sole purpose of being represented by a collective bargaining unit of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) that seeks to lobby for greater government spending (Medicaid) on home healthcare. Several personal home attendants, represented by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, sued, but the district court and Seventh Circuit upheld the order and law.

PLF joined the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence in an amicus brief written by Tom Caso, urging the U.S. Supreme Court to answer that question, and today the Court agreed to do so. PLF will continue working with CCJ on the merits brief, arguing that compelling personal care providers to be deemed public employees for the purpose of being represented by a union violates the First Amendment guarantee that Americans cannot be compelled to speak or associate, or petition the government, against their wishes. Moreover, we will argue that lobbying is not a legitimate “collective bargaining” function.

* I checked the indispensable SCOTUS Blog and they have one link to a Law Professors Blog Network post by Steven D. Schwinn

Because the Supreme Court has long allowed this kind of mandatory fee, the Seventh Circuit upheld the fee in Harris. (There was just one twist: personal assistants look a little like state employees and a little like personal employees of the patients they serve, or state contractors. The Seventh Circuit ruled that they were state employees.)

The Court now will review that ruling. But it doesn’t start from scratch. That’s because the Court ruled in Knox in 2012–after the Seventh Circuit handed down Harris–that a public union couldn’t use an opt-out procedure for special assessment fees for non-members for non-union activities; instead, the Court said it had to use an opt-in procedure. In other words, the Court ruled that the state couldn’t require non-members to pay the special assessment for non-activities but opt out; instead, the state could only allow non-members to opt in. […]

the Knox opinion (penned by Justice Alito) included strong language suggesting that the broader Abood rule violated free speech and free association. That is, Knox comes very close to saying that states can’t require non-members to pay even for union activities–even though that question wasn’t before the Court.

In other words, the Court in Knox sounded like it was just waiting for a case to give it a chance to overturn the Abood rule that non-members can be assessed fees for union activities.

Harris might just be that case. If so, Harris could represent a big blow to public union power. Indeed, depending on how the Court might rule, it could mark the beginning of the end of public unions (if the beginning hasn’t already happened). […]

The Court could rule differently, though–on Abood’s application to independent contractors and even to the private sector–and that’s where the facts matter. Remember that the Seventh Circuit said that personal assistants were state employees, but that they also look a little like private employees. Abood applies to public employees, and the Seventh Circuit was clear that “we do not consider whether Abood would still control if the personal assistants were properly labeled independent contractors rather than employees.” “And we certainly do not consider whether and how a state might force union representation for other health care providers who are not state employees, as the plaintiffs fear.” Op. at 15. This kind of ruling could represent a significant blow to union power, too.

More details here.

* From the CATO Institute, which filed an amicus brief urging the USSCt to accept the case

We argue that the forcible unionization of home healthcare workers serves none of the compelling purposes for public-sector unionization that have been articulated by the Supreme Court. Because the Court has long recognized that unionization impinges certain constitutional rights, it has limited public-sector collective bargaining to those situations which advance the aims of promoting “labor peace” and eliminating “free riders.”

Labor peace is promoted by limiting competing workplace interests from bargaining over the conditions of employment — for example, two unions at the same workplace representing different colleagues.

Free riders are non-union employees who enjoy the benefits of union-achieved gains without paying into the union’s war chest. But neither aim is promoted by a system, such as Illinois’s, in which employees work in different locations and in which the customer — the disabled person paying the homecare worker through a Medicaid disbursal — still controls every crucial aspect of the employment relationship, including hiring and firing. This last fact is most telling: the Illinois law only allows collective bargaining for higher wages and more generous benefits.

That is, the law is only about speech — petitioning the government for higher wages and benefits — and does not address workplace conditions at all.

As more and more states push to unionize more workers who indirectly receive government money — campaigns that, in face of dwindling private-sector union membership, have been called “labor’s biggest victory in over sixty years” — it is vital that the Supreme Court articulate a limiting principle on this practice. Otherwise, more and more of us will be forced to interact with our representatives only through government — appointed bodies.

* From SEIU

We’re confident that the Supreme Court will honor its own precedent and reaffirm that unions are entitled to collect reduced fees from non-members to cover the costs of negotiating wage increases and other benefits on their behalf.

There is a long legacy of previous Supreme Court decisions finding that “fair share fees” – reduced fees that unions charge to non-members to represent them in collective bargaining – are fully constitutional.

If the Supreme Court rules any differently in the Harris case, it will abandon a position it has established and reinforced repeatedly. That is why we’re anticipating that the Supreme Court will uphold the rulings of both the federal and district courts in the Harris case, each of which rejected the effort to invalidate fair share fees paid by non-union home care personal assistants in Illinois. […]

So far two federal courts have firmly rejected efforts to void fair share fees and all the benefits it has generated for Illinois home care workers and their consumers. We’re confident the Supreme Court will make the same decision.

  30 Comments      


Question of the day

Thursday, Oct 3, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* As the Illinois Family Institute correctly points out today, the gay marriage bill offers no protection for business owners who do not want to provide services for gay marriages.

The IFI continues…

[Rep. Greg Harris] cited the Illinois Human Rights Act as his justification for not protecting the rights of people of faith to refuse to use their labor and goods in the service of an event that violates their deeply held religious beliefs. Well, the Illinois Human Rights Act also prohibits discrimination based on religion; hence the conflict of which Chai Feldblum spoke. Harris finds discriminating based on religion tolerable and justifiable but not discrimination based on sexual predilection.

By the way, choosing not to participate in a same-sex “wedding” does not reflect discrimination against persons. It reflects discriminating among types of events.

The elderly florist who is being sued by the state of Washington for her refusal to provide flowers for a same-sex “wedding” did not discriminate against a person. She made a judgment about an event. She had previously sold flowers to one of the homosexual partners. She served all people regardless of their sexual predilections, beliefs, sexual activities, or relationships. She just wouldn’t participate in an eventthat she (rightly) believes the God she serves abhors.

It’s an interesting point. After all, the Catholic Church and lots of other denominations are denouncing gay marriage, which puts their religious adherents in a bind if asked to “participate” in an event (by selling products or services for that event) that they deeply oppose.

No business, by longstanding law, is allowed to refuse to provide services to a gay person because that person is gay, but asking businesses to provide services for an event is another concept. ADDING: Judging from some comments, there is a disagreement over whether it actually is a separate concept. OK, I can see that side as well. But even if I fully concede the point, the question remains.

* The Question: Should Illinois business owners be required under law to provide services and products for gay marriages, regardless of the owners’ religious beliefs? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.


surveys

  151 Comments      


Fun with numbers

Thursday, Oct 3, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Sen. Kirk Dillard talked about the economy during an Elmhurst College event this week

Dillard reminded the audience of his previous work as Chief of Staff to former Illinois governor Jim Edgar in the early 1990s.

“I know what a state that runs on all cylinders looks like,” Dillard said.

Not quite.

* As I told you earlier today, the U of I Flash Index currently has Illinois at 106.5. A rating above 100 signifies growth, below 100 means contraction.

If you check the Flash Index archives, you’ll see that the index was above 100 for just two months during Dillard’s 1991-1992 tenure as chief of staff. The highest it ever got was 102.5. The lowest was 92.2.

At the end of December, 1992, the state’s unemployment rate was 7.2 percent, down from a high of 8.5 percent earlier that year. That’s lower than it is now, and the economy was obviously growing by the time Dillard left the governor’s office for a Senate seat, but the economy was hardly firing on all cylinders.

  7 Comments      


Rahm and Rauner: Montana vacation buddies?

Thursday, Oct 3, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Bruce Rauner is already taking a bit of heat from his Republican gubernatorial rivals over his very close ties to Mayor Rahm Emanuel...

It’s Rauner, after all, who advised Rahm in the late ‘90s to make his fortune as an investment banker and who hired him to represent GTCR in the purchase of a home-security company from SBC Communications. Proceeds from that deal, among others, put the Clinton operative, who had no prior business experience or education, on the fast track to earning $18 million in under 3 years. Fortune in place, Rahm sprinted down the road to elective office.

Rauner’s genuine chumminess with Rahm will not help the venture capitalist in the Republican primary, and neither will Rauner’s contributions to Rahm’s campaigns.

* Carol Felsenthal digs up another

On April 17, 2012, before Rauner announced his exploratory committee for governor, the American Jewish Committee, at a dinner at the Ritz Carlton Chicago, honored Rauner with its Civic Leadership Award. More than 400 people attended, a AJC record. Mayor Emanuel introduced/roasted Rauner and presented him with the award.

Two people who were there that night told me that Rahm was extremely funny and that he mentioned that he and his family vacation at Rauner’s ranch in Montana.

That would be a nice little advantage for Rauner next fall, but, needless to say, not so much during the primary.

* Also, I did a quick Google search for the two men and found this speech by then-Congressman Rahm Emanuel in the Congressional Record on June 1, 2004

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate my good friend Bruce V. Rauner of Chicago and the Rauner Family Foundation for being honored by the American Red Cross of Greater Chicago, which is awarding Bruce with its prestigious Humanitarian Award at the Second Annual Hometown Heroes Awards breakfast. […]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the people of the Fifth Congressional District of Illinois and indeed all of Chicago, I am privileged to congratulate Bruce V. Rauner and the Rauner Family Foundation for this impressive honor, and I applaud the American Red Cross of Greater Chicago for bestowing this celebrated award on such deserving recipients.

It’s just the usual congressional boilerplate stuff, but the glowing language praising Rauner might not look so good when it’s referenced in a negative TV ad - that is, if anybody ever runs one.

…Adding… Frank Zappa’s “Montana” has been in my head since I wrote this post. I forgot how great the guitar solo is

Gonna be a dental floss tycoon

  40 Comments      


Yet another twist in legislative salary case

Thursday, Oct 3, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Gov. Pat Quinn asked the Illinois Supreme Court to hear a direct appeal of Judge Neil Cohen’s decision that killed off his veto of legislative salaries

Cohen’s decision to back House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-Chicago) and Senate President John Cullerton (D-Chicago), who opposed Quinn’s move, revolved around constitutional language that prohibits legislators’ salaries from “changes” during their existing terms in office.

But on Wednesday, Quinn argued that Cohen ignored the governor’s constitutional right to veto appropriations bills and statements by delegates to the state’s 1970 constitutional convention that intended for the term “changes” to apply to increases in pay.

Quinn pointed to at least seven instances in which legislators voted to reduce their pay, dating back to the 92nd session of the General Assembly between 2001 and 2002.

That’s an interesting twist because legislative furloughs have been approved time and time again. I made an argument in today’s Capitol Fax that Quinn might’ve looked at the wrong angle.

But there’s something else that I didn’t mention because I didn’t realize it at the time. Lawyers for Cullerton and Madigan argued earlier in the case that the furlough laws were, plain and simply, unconstitutional. They’ve remained on the books because nobody has ever challenged the constitutionality of the furlough laws.

So, there’s an interesting argument from the two legislative leaders. “So what? We passed unconstitutional bills. So sue us.”

  32 Comments      


Not enough growth

Thursday, Oct 3, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* This doesn’t look too bad

The University of Illinois flash index jumped from 106.5 in August to 107 in September — its highest level in more than six years.

The index is considered a barometer of the Illinois economy. The last time it was this high was April 2007, when the index stood at 107.4.

Generally, readings above 100 indicate the economy is growing, while readings below 100 show the economy is shrinking.

The index is a weighted average of Illinois growth rates in corporate earnings, consumer spending and personal income.

To reflect those, economist J. Fred Giertz looks at Illinois corporate income tax receipts, retail sales tax receipts and individual income tax receipts.

In September, all three components were up, when adjusted for inflation, from September 2012.

* There’s a catch, of course

However, a disconnect remains between the unemployment rate and other measures of economic activity such as the Flash Index and GDP. The national unemployment rate has fallen over the past year, but remains well above 7 percent, which is high in comparison to past recoveries.

“Unemployment in Illinois is even more dire than the national rate,” said economist J. Fred Giertz, who compiles the index for the university’s Institute of Government and Public Affairs. “The state rate is 9.2 percent. This is the same as one year ago, and the second highest in the nation; only Nevada’s rate is higher.”

The expanding Illinois economy has not experienced sufficient growth to reabsorb the unemployed while creating jobs for new workforce entrants.

* Economic growth for the past three years has been steady, but it’s not strong enough

* To put this into some more perspective, the highest Flash Index rating since 1981 was a robust 120.3, way back in January of 1985. The lowest was an anemic 85.9 in April of 1983.

  18 Comments      


Cullerton backs conference committee ideas

Thursday, Oct 3, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Senate President John Cullerton told the SJ-R editorial board basically what he told me a couple of weeks ago. He backs the proposal being worked on by the pension reform conference committee. Bernie

Elements of the compromise include having what is now a 3 percent compounded cost of living adjustment added to pension payments changed to half of the Consumer Price Index. Cullerton said the COLA couldn’t drop below 1 percent.

“It has a ceiling of 4 percent,” he added, “which is important because if there is inflation, there could be an actual opportunity for people to … get more than they’re getting now.”

Estimates are that the proposal would have state pension funds fully funded by 2043.

The proposal would also decrease active employee contributions by 1 percentage point.

“It’s not that much money in the big picture in terms of the savings,” Cullerton said of that drop in employee contributions.

The combination of reduced employee contributions and “inflation protection” afforded by allowing the COLA to potentially rise to 4 percent, Cullerton said, could solidify the argument that the plan meets requirements of the state constitution, which doesn’t allow pension benefits to be diminished.

The Senate President said he hoped to find 18 votes for the conference committee report, meaning Republicans would have to come up with 12.

* Cullerton also said he figures the unions will sue to block the bill on constitutional grounds

“That’s fine with me, because if it were to pass and be ruled unconstitutional, “we go right back to the bill we passed that the unions supported, tweak it some more, get some more savings — that’s my opinion — and then pass that.”

Maybe. Or maybe a new governor comes in (Rauner, for example) and decides to dump defined benefits going forward altogether.

  65 Comments      


Learning from the past?

Thursday, Oct 3, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Congressional Republicans got royally hammered when they shut down the government during Bill Clinton’s presidency. This time around, they appear to have learned from at least some of their mistakes. An NRCC press release…

Rep. Bill Enyart today voted against providing immediate government funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the nation’s medical research agency tasked with making important medical discoveries and treating patients with the worst diseases. Recent media reports have said the NIH will have to turn away hundreds of patients, including children with cancer, due to President Obama’s government shutdown.

“How can Bill Enyart live with himself when he voted to keep Obama’s government shutdown and voted against funding for cancer patients?” said NRCC Communications Director Andrea Bozek. “Bill Enyart’s inexplicable decision to put Obama’s government shutdown ahead of cancer treatment for kids shows how wildly out of touch he is with everyone else in America.”

* They’ve successfully catapulted this issue into the mainstream. CNN

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid fired off over a question about whether the Democratic-controlled Senate would vote to restore funding for children undergoing clinical trials at the National Institutes of Health.

Asked by CNN Chief Congressional Correspondent Dana Bash if the Senate would follow the House’s plans to vote for a bill to fund the NIH during the shutdown, Reid blasted the GOP-controlled House and insulted Bash.

“What right do they have to pick and choose which part of government is going to be funded? It’s obvious what’s going on here. You talk about reckless and irresponsible, wow,” he said. (

* Meanwhile, freshman Republican Rodney Davis is still struggling with his effort to placate both sides

A Davis constituent tells The Huffington Post that a Davis aide told him Wednesday, “Congressman Davis is prepared to vote ‘yes’ on a clean [Continuing Resolution that funds Obamacare along with the rest of the government].” Asked for comment, Davis spokesman Andrew Flach told HuffPost that Davis isn’t “going to speculate” on what bills may come up in the House and “will continue to vote for proposals brought to the floor that will fund the federal government.”

…Adding… From opposition research specialist Will Caskey in comments…

Rich, just FYI, Rodney Davis voted against a full/clean CR yesterday. Democrats brought it up in a motion to recommit on the latest mini-CR. It was ruled out of order, which can be overruled by a simple majority.

Davis along with every Republican voted to table the motion: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll512.xml

So if he is saying he’s prepared to vote for a clean CR he’s lying.

  45 Comments      


Rough waters ahead?

Thursday, Oct 3, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Greg Hinz takes a look at the ADM subsidy bill, which would provide the company with about $1.2 million a year in EDGE tax receipts for 15-20 years

At a hearing yesterday of the House Revenue Committee, the proposal caught immediate fire from House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie and others, who asked whether the cash-strapped state should be giving special help to one particular company. But the company and its new attorney — Mike Kasper, a close associate of House Speaker Michael Madigan — responded by withdrawing the request for the utility-tax break, and suggesting that the firm really likes Illinois.

But even if Mr. Madigan signs on to the bill — Revenue Committee Chairman John Bradley says he has “no idea” when and if the bill might come up for a vote — the measure now is opposed by [Sen. Andy Manar]. He’s former chief of staff to Senate President John Cullerton, whose chamber is more liberal and has been more resistant to corporate handouts than the House.

Specifically, Mr. Manar said he’ll oppose the bill unless ADM effectively replaces the headquarters jobs by adding 100 slots elsewhere in Decatur.

“I don’t think we can ignore the fact that Decatur has the highest unemployment level in the state,” as high as 25 percent in some neighborhoods, Mr. Manar said — particularly when the company wants a subsidy to move jobs within Illinois.

ADM’s spokeswoman said the company “is negotiating” with Mr. Manar and will not comment on those talks right now.

* And Bernie reports that Cullerton is standing with Manar

Cullerton said he would like to see the corporate headquarters of Archer Daniels Midland Co. stay in Illinois. […]

“Whether we should incentivize them is another question,” Cullerton said, noting Decatur’s high unemployment rate. He said any tax incentive should be tied to doing something to “make up for that loss of jobs in Decatur.”

* Back to Hinz

Meanwhile, neither Mr. Quinn’s office nor the state’s Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity had a comment on where he stands on the matter. That’s likely an indication that a governor who doesn’t much like corporate subsidies in the best of circumstances doesn’t want to expend any political capital on a bill that’s in trouble.

Actually, the governor appears to love these subsidies. It was a last-minute EDGE credit to Ford that resulted in lots more jobs which helped save Quinn’s behind in the 2012 Democratic primary.

However, there is word from inside that the governor isn’t all that enthusiastic about this specific ADM proposal as-is. The fact that he has refused comment so far is, indeed, telling.

  21 Comments      


Protected: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition, crosstabs and a campaign roundup

Thursday, Oct 3, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

  Comments Off      


Protected: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)

Thursday, Oct 3, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

  Comments Off      


Question of the day

Wednesday, Oct 2, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* From the Illinois Policy Institute

Earlier this year Texas Gov. Rick Perry wrote a letter to Illinois’ businesses and individuals trying to sell them on a move to Texas. The sales pitch was simple — it wasn’t tax credits, grants or sweetheart deals. The sales pitch was this — Texas doesn’t have an income tax.

As we learned yesterday, ADM pays next to no state income tax. That’s why it wants an EDGE tax credit. Lowering the company’s tax rate wouldn’t provide ADM with the money it wants to locate its new world headquarters and tech center in Chicago.

* I don’t like these “incentives” much, particularly when it involves moving a company from one part of Illinois to another.

But we need to focus on facts and not simple-minded ideology as this debate goes forward - and it will go forward. The state tax rate means little to nothing to ADM.

Zurich North America explained to the House Revenue Committee yesterday that insurance companies don’t pay corporate income taxes. They pay a different sort of tax. ZNA wants an EDGE credit to move its headquarters less than a mile within Schaumburg to a TIF district.

The tax rate did, however, mean something to CME, which loudly threatened to pull out of Chicago. But even there, the story I’m told is that some complicated tax changes took effect without CME taking notice and its tax burden went way up.

* The other easy way out is the liberal perspective that this “corporate welfare” must absolutely end. Yet, for the most part, we hear nothing about truly reforming workers’ comp laws from that crowd - and workers’ comp costs are far more likely to send companies to other states than corporate taxes.

* And while the two extremes debate, Texas, Florida, Indiana, Wisconsin, etc. are all trying to poach our companies. Maybe you don’t care. But we need jobs here, man. And considering our national reputation - even though some of it is undeserved - it’s crystal clear that business execs ain’t keen on coming here and/or expanding here without some state help.

* Almost never mentioned is our low entrepreneurial rate here. We have a climate that simply doesn’t encourage innovative startups, unless those startup folks have some insider knowledge or help. As just one example, restaurants in Chicago have such a powerful lobby that the city had to impose ridiculous limits on food trucks. The overly restrictive medical marijuana law is another. We’re just too afraid of change.

* What we need is a sane, rational, but innovative tax and regulatory system here.

The fracking law shows that this is possible. All sides came together and we should soon be reaping the benefits.

So, it can be done. But we need real leadership at the top which can convince the entrenched interests on all sides that we all benefit when we open the door to innovation.

I don’t advocate following the Texas model. We need our own.

* Instead of a question today, how about we talk about things we’ve seen that are messed up and how we can fix them.

  61 Comments      


Gay marriage roundup

Wednesday, Oct 2, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* The publisher of the Windy City Times is demanding a veto session vote on gay marriage

A lot of people have called me naive ( and worse ) when it comes to pushing for a vote in May—and now. But I am not alone in wanting to know where people stand. They do not need more time to decide if they have courage. You either have it or you don’t. If your career is more important than your integrity, or than doing what is right, than maybe you are in the wrong profession. In the 1980s Chicago City Council, the community pressed multiple times for a vote on the gay-rights law, and each time more politicians joined the side of justice. But we had to start with a vote to know where to press for change. […]

Let me be clear: There is a lot more to lose here if they delay a vote than if they lose a vote. There is far more courage in fighting for what is right and losing than staying on the sidelines. If we lose, we will fight another day ( and encourage people to get married in other states in the meantime ). And if a similar bill returns next spring, and passes after a lot more work, it would start the same time as if it were to have passed this fall with a simple majority. But we do not want that.

What do we want? A vote. When do we want it? This fall.

* Others are trying to tamp down expectations. An article from Windy City Times

It’s a matter of strategy and not an issue of support, say advocates, but sponsors and leaders might wait to call for a vote on marriage equality until winter, despite promises to push for this fall.

John Kohlhepp, campaign manager for Illinois Unites for Marriage, told Windy City Times that leaders have their sights set on the fall veto session. But he added that the team is also debating holding off on a vote until January, a move that would give the bill an earlier effective date but might raise eyebrows among supporters who expected to see a vote sooner.

“Everything in our whole strategy is pushing for a vote in veto session,” Kohlhepp said. But, he added, coalition leaders have not ruled out push during regular session.

If passed during the legislature’s veto session, SB10, the marriage equality bill, would not take effect until June. But if sponsors pass it in January during regular session, it can go into effect the following month. That could mean fewer months of waiting for same-sex couples anxious to see marriage in Illinois.

My best guess would be next May, safely after the primary. But, heck, I could be quite wrong. Your guess?

* Leader Durkin thinks it’ll pass eventually

The new leader of Illinois House Republicans says the writing seems to be on the wall for marriage equality in the state. House Minority Leader Jim Durkin said his personal religious convictions cause him to oppose gay marriage, but he acknowledged the likelihood it may someday be the law of the land.

“They’ve been able to achieve a lot in a very short amount of time. We just got to go back…a little bit of history…back in the last lame duck session, where they produced an income tax increase, repealed the death penalty, and passed a civil union bill within a 48-hour period with just Democratic votes.”

While Durkin points out the Democrats huge majorities in Springfield, he cautions same-sex marriage is not a Democratic or Republican issue.

* But Zorn prefers a judicial solution

Gay marriage is not a right to be granted or conferred by a newly generous majority. It’s a right to be recognized. At last and forever.

* In other news, Rep. Greg Harris, Ald. Deb Mell, Thomas More Society senior counsel Peter Breen and Catholic Conference of Illinois executive director Robert Gilligan debated gay marriage in Chicago last night. Skip ahead to about the 8-minute mark. Watch

* And the Illinois Family is planning a veto session lobby day and hopes to bring thousands of folks to Springfield. Here’s a promo video

* Related…

* Military Veterans Join Push for Illinois Gay Marriage

* Gay pastor finds new ministry in marriage fight

  30 Comments      


Protected: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY: This just in…

Wednesday, Oct 2, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

  Comments Off      


Third strike for Health Alliance?

Wednesday, Oct 2, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Is this yet another waste of time? We’ll see

The state has selected four new contractors for state retiree health coverage, effective Jan. 1, 2014, and Health Alliance Medical Plans isn’t among them.

That will require 6,000 retirees who get their care through the Carle health system to change where they go for medical care by the end of the year, Health Alliance spokeswoman Jane Hayes said Wednesday morning. […]

None of the selected insurers has Carle in its provider networks, which is why current retirees in the state system would have to change where they go for health care, Hayes said.

* Health Alliance has a vast provider network that it’s built up over many years. There are legit worries about not enough doctors to go around. That was also the case two years ago

Health Alliance wasn’t selected for state employee and retiree health coverage in 2011 contract selections, setting off a public uproar, legislative action and a court challenge, and was eventually restored as an insurer for employees and retirees.

* But this battle to dethrone Health Alliance goes beyond 2011. Rod Blagojevich tried to do it, too. From 2004

Meanwhile, another health-care related issue involving the state has drawn the attention of federal investigators. A spokeswoman for Health Alliance, a longtime health insurance provider for state employees, said Friday that federal agents had questioned officials from the firm. The spokeswoman said Health Alliance was not being investigated.

Health Alliance and state workers complained after the Blagojevich administration earlier this year dropped the insurance provider after trying to rebid the insurance contract. The resulting outcry forced the administration to extend the state’s existing insurance contracts, including Health Alliance’s.

State Sen. Rick Winkel (R-Champaign) said his contacts at Health Alliance have told him the U.S. attorney’s office had contacted the company regarding irregularities in the bidding process.


* Meanwhile, another state move
is causing some consternation out there as well. Just one of many e-mails from a retired state employee reader…

Rich, I received a letter today that was from a company that is representing CMS. They are doing an audit check to make sure my dependents are still qualified to be on my insurance plan. They are asking for a copy of my federal tax face page and property tax statement for 2012. There were other ways to prove if your wife or kids are allowed to be on your plan. I have been married for 39 years and worked for the state for 23. I guess they are trying to purge the insurance rolls and remove unqualified people. The company doing this work is from Indiana. You would think CMS would be able to do this without hiring a out of state company. Failure to comply with this will result in cancellation of the dependents insurance.

  58 Comments      


Fix it, please

Wednesday, Oct 2, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* This is welcomed news. Tribune editorial board

Illinois Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas Kilbride, in a Sept. 26 letter, has called for Chief Judge Timothy Evans, County Board President Toni Preckwinkle, State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez, Sheriff Tom Dart, Public Defender Abishi Cunningham and court administrator Michael Tardy to meet with the members of the state Supreme Court. The purpose: frank talk about the operations of the criminal courts.

Kilbride has also invited Eric Washington, chief judge of the Washington, D.C., Court of Appeals, who is well-versed in court management issues. Make no mistake, this is an extraordinary turn of events. The Illinois Supreme Court generally is quite reluctant to step into the operations of local courts.

It didn’t have much choice in this case, not after Preckwinkle pleaded for help in a Sept. 12 letter to Justice Lloyd Karmeier. She requested that a judge from outside Cook County be assigned to help process delayed criminal cases. She also asked the court to convene a commission to audit the system and to develop long-term solutions to the problem. […]

The sheriff’s office reports that more than 300 inmates have waited three years or more for their cases to conclude, 55 of them for five years or more. On the civil side, many people who rely on the courts to settle their cases — divorces, child custody, foster care — face a long, expensive haul from start to finish.

The entire system is a freaking mess. The circuit court clerk should also be involved, however, because her office is about as antiquated as they come. I can’t tell you how many horror stories I’ve heard about people getting caught up in the county judicial system.

* More

This isn’t uncharted territory. Other counties and other states have improved efficiency by implementing electronic case filing, video conferencing of bond hearings and cameras in the courtrooms, which let the public see how the courts are working. The leaders of other court systems have forced lollygagging judges to step up and put in a full day’s work.

In New York City, court officials frustrated with the slow pace of justice in Bronx courtrooms put an outside judge in charge. In less than a year, Justice Patricia DiMango transformed the Bronx courts into a fair and efficient system, resolving hundreds of cases that had lingered for two years or more.

If an outside judge is what it takes, the powers that be should make it happen. ASAP.

* Speaking of Tribune editorials I like, here’s one about child abuse

Three out of every four deaths linked to child abuse involve households that had no prior contact with the department. While DCFS gets its share of blame for child deaths that could have been prevented, the fact is most abuse is never brought to the department’s attention. According to a recent report, 70 percent of all child abuse in the U.S. goes unreported.

According to DCFS, children tell an average of seven adults they are being mistreated before it gets reported to authorities. Seven adults.

Ugh.

* More

DCFS installed a new phone system last fall, after the Tribune reported that an unreliable, outdated hotline was preventing callers from getting through. The new system ensures a live person will answer promptly and start a quicker DCFS response. We tested it on a busy Friday afternoon and reached a dispatcher after waiting less than two minutes. Use it.

  26 Comments      


Chutzpah, fruitless and in the middle

Wednesday, Oct 2, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* The National Republican Congressional Committee is running a radio ad targeting freshman Democrat Bill Enyart for causing the government shutdown. I kid you not.

Here’s the NRCC ad script…

How out-of-touch is Bill Enyart with Illinois families? So out-of-touch that he voted to shut down the government in order to protect Congress’ taxpayer funded healthcare!

While Washington forces ObamaCare on Illinois families, Enyart votes to give himself a break.

Instead of living by the same rules as everyone else, members of Congress receive special subsidies to pay for their healthcare.

And what are Illinois families left with? Higher premiums, higher health care costs and less access to quality care.

Washington is broken and it’s clear Enyart is part of the problem.

Call Bill Enyart today and tell him it’s time to put Illinois families first and stop the sweetheart deals for Congress.

Paid for by the National Republican Congressional Committee and not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. www-dot-NRCC-dot-org. The National Republican Congressional Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising.

* Statement from the NRCC…

“Bill Enyart has proven time and time again how out-of-touch he is with Southern Illinois families. He’s put his own taxpayer-funded healthcare above the needs of his constituents, and after voting to shut down the government this week it’s clear that his priorities do not lie with hardworking Southern Illinois families.” – NRCC Spokeswoman Danielle Varallo

* Meanwhile, here’s a communique from the DCCC about an Illinois Republican…

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is launching a paid grassroots campaign to tell Congressman Peter Roskam to end their government shutdown, a manufactured crisis that he created. The DCCC’s automated phone calls will connect the people of Illinois directly to Congressman Roskam so they can tell him to “stop the nonsense and focus on common sense solutions that protect our health care and grow our economy.”

An example of the call script running against Congressman Peter Roskam is below:

    While you were sleeping, Congressman Peter Roskam shut down the government. You heard that right. But even worse – Congressman Roskam is still getting paid – and he’s not listening to our frustration. All because of his demand to take away your benefits and protect insurance company profits.

    Call Congressman Roskam at (630) 232-0006 to end the shutdown.

Roskam’s district is overwhelmingly Republican, so I really doubt that the national polls and these robocalls will have any impact at all.

* One person who is truly in the middle of all this is freshman Republican Rodney Davis, who faces a primary opponent from his right and a well-funded Democrat to his left. From a Davis press release…

“Like most of those I represent, I remain opposed to Obamacare, but a government shutdown is absolutely unacceptable,” said Davis. “It’s unfortunate that the President and leaders in Congress were unable to negotiate in good faith to put forth just a 6-week plan to fund the federal government. The Senate has even proven to be unwilling to remove a special rule to allow a federal subsidy on health care coverage for Members of Congress and their staff. We owe it to the hardworking taxpayers to continue working as quickly as possible to compromise and get this done. I remain ready and willing to work with my colleagues and leaders in the House and the Senate, Republicans and Democrats, until we come to an agreement to fund our government.”

* From the Democrats’ House Majority PAC…

Weeks ago, Rodney Davis proudly proclaimed he’d do “whatever it takes” to end Obamacare.

And Davis followed it up with action, voting four separate, distinct times to shut down the government over the Affordable Care Act.

And now? As it’s clear voters blame Republicans for shutting down the government, shuttering the National Parks, furloughing hundreds of thousands of workers, and potentially delaying veterans’ benefits:

Davis: “I remain opposed to Obamacare, but a government shutdown is absolutely unacceptable.”

POLITICO — Vulnerable Republicans: End the shutdown

* From WUIS

[Democratic opponent Ann Callis] immediately pounced, saying Davis helped force the shutdown to score points with what she calls his “right wing base.”

“He’s one of many of the Republicans that are doing this. I mean if you don’t like a law you don’t shut down the government. It is harming, and it’s already coming out now. Hundreds of thousands of people are being affected by this. And it’s not the right way to govern. It’s just not.”

In a statement, Congressman Davis calls the government shutdown “unacceptable,” although he has consistently voted with House Republicans who are attempting to dismantle the Affordable Care Act.

As always, try to take a deep breath and remain calm in comments. DC politics can really bring out the nutbags, so let’s not encourage them.

  62 Comments      


*** UPDATED x1 *** No veto session vote?

Wednesday, Oct 2, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Rep. Elaine Nekritz told the Tribune’s Rick Pearson Sunday that she thought a pension reform vote could be held during veto session. She said this despite telling the SJ-R’s Doug Finke late last week: “I have stopped making predictions on time because mine have all been very wrong.”

Well, maybe she should’ve taken her own advice with Pearson. The bill obviously can’t pass without Republican votes, and House Republican Leader Jim Durkin doesn’t think there will be action during veto session

The Western Springs lawmaker also says he has doubts meaningful pension legislation will come up for a vote during the upcoming fall veto session. Some members of the bipartisan legislative commission studying ways to plug Illinois’ massive $100 billion pension hole say much progress has been made this summer and a bill could be passed on to the governor soon.

Durkin says that’s more likely to happen in a special session prior to January.

If he wants to wait that long, I don’t know why he wouldn’t want to put it off until January, when the bill could have an immediate effective date.

*** UPDATE *** From Leader Durkin’s press secretary…

“Leader Durkin is not suggesting that we need to wait to vote on pension reform until January. Rather, the point he is trying to make is that we are getting close to veto session and there is no agreement yet. He is simply cautioning that a vote may not occur during the six days scheduled for veto. If an agreement is reached after veto we can always come back to Springfield for a vote in November or December.”

  39 Comments      


Rauner and Dillard both intrigued by legislative salary veto

Wednesday, Oct 2, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Kurt Erickson

Republican gubernatorial candidates Bruce Rauner and Kirk Dillard are not ruling out using the same tactic as Gov. Pat Quinn when it comes to trying to prod the legislature into action.

Although Rauner, a political newcomer from Wilmette, called Quinn’s attempt to block lawmaker pay in order to force action on pension reform a political stunt, spokesman Mike Schrimpf said Friday, “You never want to say never.”

Dillard, a state senator from Hinsdale, is campaigning on the idea of withholding lawmaker pay under one specific scenario: “You don’t get paid unless you have a balanced budget.”

Dan Rutherford and Bill Brady said they wouldn’t use such a tactic.

Discuss.

  48 Comments      


Question of the day

Tuesday, Oct 1, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Do you believe Gov. Pat Quinn will be reelected? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.


survey solution

  83 Comments      


Isn’t there enough misinformation without stuff like this?

Tuesday, Oct 1, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* The AP needs a babysitter in its Chicago office. To wit

Illinois’ marketplace is called Get Covered Illinois. It was experiencing some glitches Tuesday. People trying to enroll we’re having problems with the website, and some reported waits of 20 minutes or more on a hotline set up to assist consumers.

Quinn says glitches are part of any new endeavor.

Actually, those were problems with the national website, as reported by the Tribune and others today, not with the state site.

The error rate at that Chicago AP office is getting really high and I’ve been meaning to write about it, so now’s a good time to start. They did change the copy, although without admitting the original mistake

But the federal website where people enroll was experiencing some glitches. Consumers couldn’t get beyond initial screens, and some reported waits of 20 minutes on a hotline set up to assist them.

Quinn says glitches are part of any new endeavor.

Sheesh.

* There was one problem with the Illinois site

At least one of the questions — “Including everyone that you live with, how much money do you get each month from the sources you selected before taxes” — did not list an actual dollar amount under choices “less than” or “more than.”

I saw that as well today and it puzzled me, especially since that question had a lot to do with whether you were then directed to the state’s Medicaid site or the federal Obamacare site.

Anyone else having problems with either the state or federal sites today?

…Adding… The media hype about overloaded websites is a bit puzzling to me.

When people stand in line for hours to buy an iPhone that is out of stock by the time they get to the front of the line it’s evidence of Apple’s amazing popularity.

When it takes forever to download a new iPhone operating system, it’s because Apple is so darned popular.

These are first-day glitches. If the problem persists, then it’s an issue.

  40 Comments      


Rauner raises over a million dollars in third quarter

Tuesday, Oct 1, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* From a press release…

Republican candidate for governor Bruce Rauner announced today that his campaign raised more than $1 million from over 1,300 donations in the third fundraising quarter.

“I am excited by the growing support for our efforts to shake up Springfield,” said Bruce Rauner. “Illinoisans understand that the career politicians have failed, and we need a fresh perspective to turn things around.”

No word on his current cash on hand.

* Meanwhile, Dan Rutherford’s tweet doesn’t say how much he actually raised in the quarter…


Rutherford ended the last quarter with $1,020,373.25 cash on hand, so he’s up only a net of $200K.

* I’ll update this post with any other major fundraising press releases today.

  36 Comments      


Some ADM context

Tuesday, Oct 1, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* The House Revenue Committee is meeting today to talk about various corporate tax breaks. Watch it live.

ADM’s fiscal officer was asked why the company didn’t just use existing tax law to underwrite its move to Chicago. ADM has dropped its request for a cut to its public utility taxes, but does want an EDGE credit. His response…

“There will be years when our income tax liability will be minimal.”

The EDGE credit allows corporations which are creating some jobs to essentially pocket the state income taxes they withhold from their employees’ paychecks. Why? Because so many corporations don’t pay much, if any, state income taxes here.

The company officer estimated that the EDGE credit it is seeking for its Chicago move (200 employees, including 100 new workers) is about $1.2 million a year. The company’s annual earnings, the officer said, average between $1-2 billion a year.

So, ADM, one of the the largest companies in the state, is paying less than $1.2 million in state income taxes in at least some years.

And that’s why the company’s guy dodged Rep. Dave McSweeney’s question about whether ADM would help him support lower tax rates in general. The simple fact is they don’t pay a lot of income taxes here. Lower overall rates just won’t matter.

  30 Comments      


Today’s numbers

Tuesday, Oct 1, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* AP

The issue of gun permits surfaced briefly in the Illinois governor’s race, when a candidate claimed that the Illinois State Police had a backlog of 75,000 gun-owner’s ID applications under Gov. Pat Quinn, forcing hunters to miss entire hunting seasons.

The real number isn’t that high — just 49,000, according to state police. But those numbers belie a bigger headache awaiting the state’s bureaucracy now that lawmakers have set in motion a process to facilitate the carrying of concealed weapons in public, as mandated by a federal court order.

Whereas a few years ago, 1.2 million Illinoisans held Firearm Owners Identification cards, the number has jumped to 1.6 million, state police spokeswoman Monique Bond said. Soon after the court decreed in December that Illinois couldn’t ban public carry anymore, demand for FOID cards jumped precipitously. In January alone, Bond reported, there were 61,000 FOID applications, nearly double the 31,000 in January 2012.

Once the state’s new concealed-carry law is fully in place, state police officials expect 400,000 applications in the first year for the $150 “carry” permits, a number on top of the 49,000 waiting for a $10 FOID which gives them permission to own a gun — permission that’s unique among states.

  42 Comments      


Irony of ironies

Tuesday, Oct 1, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Kurt Erickson

At the same time Illinois lawmakers are expected to debate a plan to strip retirement benefits from teachers, prison guards and university employees, they also may take up a proposal to deliver tax breaks to one of the state’s biggest corporations.

Four days after Decatur-based Archer Daniels Midland Co. announced plans to move its headquarters and 100 top executives and support staff out of Central Illinois, legislation was filed that would give the company financial incentives to keep its corporate address within Illinois.

* It gets even “better” than that. As I mentioned briefly to subscribers this morning, David Ormsby’s Illinois Observer reported today that another tax break bill is now in the hopper to benefit insurance giant and Schaumburg-based Zurich North America (click here to subscribe to Ormsby’s publication).

Chief Executive Officer of Zurich North America and Regional Chairman is Michael Foley.

And wouldn’t you know it, Mr. Foley also sits on the board of directors of the Civic Committee, which as we all know has been pushing hard to reduce pension benefits for public employees and retirees.

The comments pretty much write themselves.

* Related…

* Manar: ADM package offering ‘tens of millions’ in state tax breaks ‘unprecedented’

* Fight brewing over tax breaks to keep ADM in state

  66 Comments      


Question of the day

Tuesday, Oct 1, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Your one-word response to the federal government shutdown?

Please keep your answers to one word only. Thanks.

  163 Comments      


Protected: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition and a campaign roundup

Tuesday, Oct 1, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

  Comments Off      


Protected: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)

Tuesday, Oct 1, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

  Comments Off      


Defending the indefensible

Monday, Sep 30, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* OK, you’re about to see something that you’ve probably never seen here before. I’m gonna defend Rep. Bill Mitchell and Reboot Illinois.

First, Kass

The Quad City Times reported that state Rep. Bill Mitchell, R-Forsyth, said he was having lunch with a friend when Cohen’s ruling [striking down Quinn’s veto of legislative salaries[ was issued:

“His first thought was, ‘When do we get paid?’”

That was Mitchell’s first thought? When does he get paid?

Nice.

I called Springfield to speak with Rep. Mitchell about his first thoughts of getting paid, but he wasn’t available.

“His assistant is not in today,” said a lady on the phone. “She’s out. You try his district office?”

I called his district office. No answer. I left a message, then called again and again and again. Still nothing.

* The missing context from the original story

Mitchell is a full-time lawmaker, meaning he had to dig into savings to make ends meet during the impasse.

“It was a bad three months,” he said.

Unless you’re independently wealthy, if your entire income is based on one job and you aren’t getting paid for that job, then no paychecks can cause real hardships. I see no reason to pick on the guy for being honest.

* Let’s move on to a story about Reboot Illinois’ new legislative contact app

Here’s how Reboot describes itself on its website, rebootillinois.com. “Reboot Illinois aims to encourage citizens to retake ownership of our governments. Through non-partisan digital and social media, Reboot Illinois intends to engage citizens giving them the information and tools they need to act on improving the jobs climate, schools, taxes and state debt.”

One of those things is a new feature allowing people to contact their public officials via email on certain issues. This includes their local lawmakers, legislative leaders like Madigan and Cullerton, and the governor. More importantly, it also allows a person to find out just who represents them in the General Assembly simply by typing their home address into the site.

So far, so good. The trickier part comes from the suggested messages to send public officials. The site has a series of issues listed covering such things as raising the minimum wage or pension reform or the progressive income tax along with a sample letter that can be sent to lawmakers. For example, you can send a message that you do not want the state to raise the minimum wage. Or you can send a message saying that the 3 percent compounded COLAs for pension benefits must end, along with raising the retirement age for workers.

Now, if you want to say you like the idea of a higher minimum wage or that the state shouldn’t change COLAs for retirees, well, you’ll have to compose your own thoughts on that. The site doesn’t provide that option. Also, it doesn’t provide the email addresses of the public officials, so if you want to send your own thoughts, you’ll have to add a step.

Actually, you can compose your own message and it’s pretty easy. You just select all, delete what Reboot wrote and write whatever you want. The group will then send your message for you. I tried it today by sending a test message to Rep. Poe’s office and it worked fine.

Now, maybe you aren’t literate enough to write your own message, but if that’s the case, then why bother at all? Or maybe you’re not computer literate enough to know you can delete Reboot’s message and replace it with your own. So, what the heck are you doing on the Web then?

However, Reboot might wanna just add a simple message saying you can write whatever you want, just to be clear.

Click here and see for yourself.

* I tried to get in the spirit of things by finding a recent state-related Tribune editorial I could praise, but had no luck.

Sigh.

  29 Comments      


Question of the day

Monday, Sep 30, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Gov. Pat Quinn got a flu shot on Friday, the same day he failed to convince two judges for a stay during appeal of the previous day’s legislator pay ruling…

* The Question: Caption?

Funniest commenter wins a new Statehouse mobile app that I’ll be launching soon.

Our most recent winner was Old Shepherd

“As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly!”

  109 Comments      


We should all probably calm down and wait

Monday, Sep 30, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* You may have noticed that I’ve completely avoided the Illinois Obamacare implementation story. That’s by design. There’s been just way too much propaganda from both sides to easily sift through.

For instance, a few days ago Gov. Pat Quinn announced that health insurance exchange rates were lower than expected. That doesn’t really mean anything because we don’t know how much more the exchange health insurance policies will cost than what people already have, which doesn’t really mean much because the new insurance policies will cover more than many bare-bones policies currently do, which doesn’t mean much if you can’t afford the new rates, which doesn’t mean much if you qualify for subsidies, etc., etc., etc. Not to mention all the people who don’t have insurance now because they can’t afford it and may be able to with the new program.

* There’s no doubt that the rollout has been bungled. For instance

Only a fraction of the expected army of outreach workers will be certified and ready Tuesday to help Illinois residents sign up for insurance under President Barack Obama’s health care law, state officials told The Associated Press late Friday.

That will leave most people on their own to figure out the complicated enrollment process — at least during the first week of a six-month enrollment period.

Only around 100 workers will be certified by Saturday, said Kelly Sullivan, a spokeswoman for the new Illinois insurance marketplace where people will be able to comparison shop for health plans starting Tuesday. Sullivan said Illinois officials would work to certify “hundreds more” by Tuesday’s launch.

Officials have said 1,200 temporary outreach workers, hired with federal grant money, would ultimately be trained and certified. About 1.8 million Illinois residents are uninsured, about 15 percent of the population.

The outreach workers are important because the enrollment process is complicated and many consumers will need assistance. They will help walk people through the new health insurance options available to them through the online marketplace. Health care marketplaces, a key component of the Affordable Care Act, will operate in every state.

That’s just ridiculous.

* Then there was the goofy, focus-grouped logo the administration touted in a press release…

The orange color palette is decidedly optimistic, representing the colors of sunrise – tied to focus group feedback that October 1 felt like the “dawn” of a new day for those uninsured.

Really?

* But does any of this mean that the whole program is not worthwhile? The most informed take I’ve read so far is from the guy who implemented former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s health insurance program, on which Obamacare is closely based. Money quotes

“Up here in Massachusetts, the biggest opponent of the individual mandate was John Sweeney of the AFL-CIO. He said it was going to be the end of employer-based health-care here. Well, that certainly wasn’t the case.

“The analogy I like to use is a building that’s burning down. The number of people covered by employer-based health-care plans is dropping by a percentage point a year. The system is falling apart. So you put in a new safety net. That means a few more people are going to come in. If you’re not willing to risk making some things worse, you’re never going to make anything better.

“My estimate is that 80 percent of the people are not going to feel any change at all, and that 17 percent or so are going to find that things are better, and that about two or three percent will be worse off, and those are the people who benefit from the discriminatory nature of health-insurance at the present time.

“If health-insurance companies can’t discriminate any more, those people will have to pay a little more. When we decided that people couldn’t discriminate in what they paid black people or women any more, people had to pay more because employers couldn’t discriminate in what they paid black people and women. Was that a bad thing?”

* And since Obamacare has been tied in with the government shutdown/debt ceiling circus, I’ve been even more loathe to go there. As far as I can tell, this is the smartest take I’ve yet seen on what to expect with that mess

But while it’s certainly the case that Boehner thinks a shutdown would be terrible for the party, and that he’d prefer to avoid one, it’s not at all clear it’s in his interest to do so. Why? Because there are two things Boehner presumably cares about more than avoiding a shutdown: not being ousted as Speaker, and raising the debt ceiling by mid-to-late October so as to avoid a debt default. The latter would be far more damaging to the economy than a shutdown, and therefore more devastating to the Republican brand. Unfortunately for Boehner, the only plausible way to both keep his job and avoid a debt default is … to shut down the government when the fiscal year ends next week.

Here’s why: Tea Party conservatives in the House, following the lead the distinguished non-filibusterer from Texas, are all keyed up for a confrontation with Obama in which they refuse to fund the government unless they can simultaneously defund (or rather, “defund”) Obmacare. This is why Boehner and Cantor, after initially hoping to keep the two initiatives separate, reluctantly agreed to make defunding Obamacare a condition for funding the government in the bill they passed last Friday. The Democratic Senate and the president obviously aren’t going along with this. So the only way to avoid a shutdown is for Boehner to walk it back, which conservatives will regard as a humiliating retreat. […]

(O)ne of two things is probably going to happen if we avoid a shutdown: Either John Boehner is going to turn around and appease irate conservatives by insisting on delaying Obamacare in exchange for raising the debt limit, thereby sending the government into default (since Obama isn’t negotiating). Or he’s going to back down and allow the debt ceiling to be raised with a minority of House Republicans and a majority of House Democrats, thereby further infuriating conservatives and almost certainly costing himself his job. (Recall that conservatives got more than halfway to the number of defections they needed to oust Boehner back in January, after he’d merely allowed a vote on a small tax increase when a much bigger one was kicking in automatically.) That is, either Boehner gets it or the global economy gets it, both of which Boehner would like to avoid even more than he’d like to avoid a shutdown.

If Boehner resigns himself to a shutdown, on the other hand, suddenly the future looks manageable. After a few days of punishing political abuse, Boehner will be able to appear before his caucus, shrug his shoulders in his distinctive Boehnerian way, and bleat that he executed the strategy conservatives demanded, but that the country is overwhelmingly opposed to it, as are most Senate Republicans and almost every semi-legitimate right-wing pundit and media outlet. Most of these people have already said that shutting down the government would be a mistake; they would presumably only grow more vocal in as Republicans’ poll numbers collapsed and they hemorrhaged blood all over Washington. Boehner will be able to point to the party’s extreme political isolation as a reason for calling off this round of jihad, in the same way he did during the payroll tax cut debate in late 2011 and the fiscal cliff debate in late 2012. The demoralized conservatives will realize they’re out of moves—at least in this particular battle—allowing Boehner to raise the debt limit a few weeks later with little drama. There will be no debt default, and no conservative coup in the House.

Try very hard to avoid a national political throwdown in comments, please. Thanks.

  41 Comments      


Answer the question, please

Monday, Sep 30, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Rick Pearson asked Gov. Pat Quinn late Friday about the implications of the governor’s veto of legislative salaries. Quinn essentially dodged it

Asked by reporters if his veto would set a precedent for governors to withhold pay from lawmakers over other issues, as critics have alleged, Quinn said the unfunded pension liability was a “crucial, crying issue in our state.”

“It’s urgent. It’s an emergency. It’s been going on for decades. That’s why I acted as I did,” he said.

Asked if he also considered legalizing same-sex marriage, which he supports, an emergency, Quinn said: “I think it’s a very important issue, but on the issue of pensions, that deals directly with state finances, where the legislature has had much time to act, they have failed to put a bill on my desk that’s necessary for the common good.”

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the governor has exploited a very dangerous loophole. Whatever happens in the court case, going forward the Legislature ought to pass a continuing appropriations bill on their salaries so nobody can pull this stunt again.

Also, many kudos to Rick for trying to pin the governor down. More like this, please.

  24 Comments      


Still some sticking points

Monday, Sep 30, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* So, while Gov. Pat Quinn has been running all over the state cutting ribbons on capital projects approved by the General Assembly while, ironically, defending his veto of legislative salaries because those same legislators hadn’t finished their jobs, was he actually working on pension reform? Not according to Rep. Elaine Nekritz, the House Democratic point person on pensions

[Nekritz] said she had not spoken to anyone from Quinn’s office since July on the progress of pension negotiations.

* Despite Quinn’s non-involvement, or maybe because of it, Nekritz believes a pension plan could be voted on during the veto session later this month

“We’re close enough where I think that there’s a definite possibility we could take action in veto session,” Nekritz said of the scheduled Oct. 22 return of the General Assembly.

“We have a few, what I would call, details to work out, but as in any negotiation, when you get to the end, the things that were not so significant in the beginning become big,” she said in a WGN-AM 720 interview. “So, I’m not saying that the whole thing can’t fall apart, and we’ll be back to square one, but it’s also very likely we could come to an agreement and be done in a couple of weeks.”

* More

She acknowledged that the move for a 1 percentage point reduction in employee contributions to their pensions was aimed at meeting a state constitutional prohibition against diminishing or impairing public employee pension benefits.

Still, she said, “I don’t think there’s any way we can avoid being sued by the public employees — whether it be actives (current employees) or retirees.”

The House Republicans are pushing hard to eliminate that 1-point reduction, among other things.

* Sen. Kwame Raoul, who chairs the pension reform conference committee, has pushed back

“The charge of the (pension) conference committee is to come up with a proposal that we think (can) solve the pension problem … and that can pass a constitutional challenge,” Raoul said.

But, in the end, Raoul still wants a bill. So, we’ll see.

…Adding… Sun-Times editorial board

The big snag, we understand, is a new list of demands unveiled by committee Republicans two weeks ago and a new total savings target — $150 billion, up from an agreed-upon $140 billion. We want more savings, too, but what’s maddening is that most of the Republican demands don’t amount to much.

They’re pressing for things like raising the retirement age, raising the employee contribution and creating a 401(k) option. Those sound good but would barely move the cost-savings needle.

I really think this bill should not be tanked over a 30-year savings of $10 billion. But they may try to blow up the process anyway.

  101 Comments      


*** UPDATED x1 *** Has the running mate game changed?

Monday, Sep 30, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* The Sun-Times has a story called “Kwame Raoul would run for lt. gov., but Quinn’s not asking.” I asked Sen. Raoul about the rumors I’d been hearing last week, and I came away with a different impression than the Sun-Times

Lately, it’s a question that state Sen. Kwame Raoul (D-Chicago) gets all the time: Would he run as Gov. Pat Quinn’s lieutenant governor?

The answer is basically yes.

* Here’s what he told the Sun-Times

“A lot of people have been calling me,” said Raoul, who told the Chicago Sun-Times he would be open to running as Quinn’s lieutenant governor for the 2014 race. “A lot of people — not the governor — have called and inquired, hearing rumors.” […]

Raoul said he would consider the job with a major caveat — that it would come with responsibilities.

“The state Senate hasn’t been an awful place for me, I’ve been able to engage in a lot of things. It’s not the worst place in the world. I don’t have to run for higher office this time around,” Raoul said.

* And here’s what he told me via text…

Obviously, Raoul doesn’t want to just sit around his office for four years doing nothing as Quinn’s lieutenant governor. He would want some real responsibilities. Whether Quinn would give those to him is anybody’s guess. As I’ve already pointed out today, Quinn has been trying to increase the power of the governor’s office, not dilute them.

* And then there’s the fact that Quinn is now essentially unopposed in the primary. His running mate choice can now be aimed at the general election.

So, does Quinn really need an African-American running mate now? It could help boost turnout, at least some. First black lieutenant governor, etc. But how much? I dunno.

Your thoughts?

*** UPDATE *** A valid point from Matt Dietrich

Should they win in 2014, Raoul could be an effective envoy for Quinn in the General Assembly. That’s something Quinn has sorely lacked throughout his time in office. Quinn’s inability to shepherd legislation through the legislature via floor leaders has been a big weakness for his administration and is among the major reasons why his pension reform efforts led to the current stalemate.

…Adding… As some have already pointed out in comments, Quinn doesn’t listen much to Gary Hannig as it is, and the former Deputy House Majority Leader Hannig was a very good choice to run the legislative shop. If he won’t listen to Gary, would he listen to Kwame? Maybe not.

  40 Comments      


Why Quinn is appealing

Monday, Sep 30, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller

* My weekly syndicated newspaper column

A bipartisan chorus seemed to rise as one last week to urge Gov. Pat Quinn not to appeal a ruling by a Cook County judge. The judge ruled that the governor had violated the state Constitution when he vetoed lawmaker salaries last summer. Quinn said he vetoed the appropriations because he was tired of waiting for legislators to finish a pension reform plan.

Despite urgings by both Democrats and Republicans to drop the whole thing, Quinn forged ahead, issuing a defiant statement in which he vowed to pursue an appeal of Judge Neil Cohen’s decision voiding the veto and ordering lawmaker paychecks to be processed “immediately.”

Judge Cohen agreed with Quinn on one issue about veto process, but then went on to declare Quinn’s veto wasn’t valid from the moment it was issued. Cohen did so by relying on the meaning of a single word: “Changes.”

Quinn had argued that transcripts from the 1970 Illinois Constitutional Convention clearly showed that delegates hoped to stop legislators from increasing their salaries when they agreed on language that prevented “changes in the salary of a member” from taking effect during their term of office following their most recent election.

Cohen relied on two dictionary definitions to declare that the common meaning of “changes” included both increases and decreases. Therefore, Quinn’s veto violated the Constitution and was declared null and void.

It’s actually a pretty well reasoned and informed decision, especially considering the fact that Judge Cohen seemed more than a little out of his element during a previous hearing. He didn’t appear to understand the briefs that had already been presented, and appeared confused at times about the Constitution and general procedure. He even agreed to put off his decision by a week so that Madigan and Cullerton could file another brief, but then went ahead without them and gave them what they asked for.

OK, back to the appeal, which is no surprise, to say the least. Even setting aside the overwhelming popularity of the governor’s veto and Quinn’s natural stubbornness, there should have never been any doubt that Quinn would attempt to appeal this ruling.

Quinn has jealously guarded his powers and attempted - often bungling - to expand the powers of his office ever since he was elevated in 2009. One of the ways he’s done this is by issuing presidential-like “signing statements.” His latest, issued in July, promised that he would not allow a bill he’d signed to undermine the state’s compliance with a class action consent decree. Quinn is the first to use such statements, which are normally reserved for vetoes.

He has also constantly meddled in the affairs of various boards and commissions, demanding resignations of the University of Illinois Board of Trustees after a political influence scandal and recently calling for the ouster of the director of the state’s torture commission. He attempted to pack Southern Illinois University’s board this year in order to get his way at that university, but was solidly rebuked when the Senate unanimously rejected his appointees.

Quinn called for the “fumigation” of state government when he was first elevated to the office, but then resisted several legislative efforts designed to get rid of Blagojevich holdovers, saying it was his job to fire them.

An appeal, therefore, would be right in line with Quinn’s history of protecting and expanding his powers. He clearly believes he had the absolute right to veto those salaries and that the judge was wrong to stop him. This is more than just a political game to Quinn, even though the game is most definitely part of it.

He acts like such a goofball at times that it’s often difficult to take what he says and does at face value, but this is obviously very serious business to the governor. Make no mistake, Quinn wants the right to do this again. And he wants his successors to have this right in order to bring the General Assembly to heel.

Most people don’t know that Chicago mayors are legally quite weak. They compensate by building strong political organizations.

Illinois governors are constitutionally strong, so state legislative leaders have compensated for their comparative weakness by building huge political fiefdoms and devising innumerable rules to stymie the governor’s powers. Quinn appears to be trying to inject some balance into the government with this veto.

Discuss.

  37 Comments      


« NEWER POSTS PREVIOUS POSTS »
* Hexaware: Your Globally Local IT Services Partner
* SB 328: Separating Lies From Truth
* When RETAIL Succeeds, Illinois Succeeds
* SB 328 Puts Illinois’s Economy At Risk
* SB 328: Separating Lies From Truth
* Hexaware: Your Globally Local IT Services Partner
* SB 328 Puts Illinois’s Economy At Risk
* When RETAIL Succeeds, Illinois Succeeds
* Reader comments closed for the next week
* Isabel’s afternoon roundup
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Campaign updates
* Three-quarters of OEIG investigations into Paycheck Protection Program abuses resulted in misconduct findings
* SB 328 Puts Illinois’s Economy At Risk
* Sen. Dale Fowler honors term limit pledge, won’t seek reelection; Rep. Paul Jacobs launches bid for 59th Senate seat
* Hexaware: Your Globally Local IT Services Partner
* Pritzker to meet with Texas Dems as Trump urges GOP remaps (Updated)
* SB 328: Separating Lies From Truth
* Open thread
* Isabel’s morning briefing
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today's edition
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Selected press releases (Live updates)
* Yesterday's stories

Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............


Loading


Main Menu
Home
Illinois
YouTube
Pundit rankings
Obama
Subscriber Content
Durbin
Burris
Blagojevich Trial
Advertising
Updated Posts
Polls

Archives
July 2025
June 2025
May 2025
April 2025
March 2025
February 2025
January 2025
December 2024
November 2024
October 2024
September 2024
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005

Syndication

RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0




Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller