Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Sign of the times?
Next Post: December’s quotable
Posted in:
* A good point by Madeleine Doubek …
1. Madigan reminded all within earshot that when Rauner first gave his state budget address, which did indeed include more than $2 billion in pension savings that were unlikely to be achieved, that the Speaker called it “reckless” then and has been calling it “reckless” since.
2. Then the Speaker proceeded to tell reporters that he consistently has said Illinois needs a balanced approach of both spending cuts and new revenue. Therefore, he said, House and Senate Democrats will work this week to pass a budget for next year that spends more than $3 billion more than the state takes from taxpayers.
3. So, you might logically ask, if Rauner’s budget with $2 billion in phantom savings was “reckless,” what does that make Madigan’s admittedly out-of-whack $3 billion-plus budget? Extremely reckless? (Actually, it appears to be closer to a $4 billion hole.)
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:01 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Sign of the times?
Next Post: December’s quotable
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
This is all about who goes first on revenue.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:02 am
Hypocritical?
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:04 am
Posturing again, instead of governing. When will Illinois get elected officials who do the right thing, instead of what is politically expedient for themselves?
Comment by One of the 35 Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:08 am
This is the democratic budget with their spending priories without raising taxes. They want to shift the argument and focus to “Rauner if you want to cut please go ahead”. If you don’t then you seem to be accepting the idea that we need more revenue and we would like you to join us in that so we can spread the blame politically.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:10 am
I believe new revenue will require Rauner, Cullerton and Madigan to hold a joint press conference and make the proposal together. Shared responsibility.
Failing that, Article IV, Section 9, paragraph d of the Illinois Constitution makes it perfectly clear that the Governor has the last word - and therefore ownership - of whatever spending cuts become necessary due to a lack of revenue.
Comment by Bill White Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:10 am
They’re the exact same thing! Why do we need these op-eds trade these “nanner nanner boo boos”? Neither are less shamtastic than the others. Each “side” is trying to play this hypocritical card, but it’s like an endless feedback loop. You’re both hypocrites!
Comment by Johnny Pyle Driver Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:10 am
They’re about the same.
The difference is one admits that his proposal is out of whack and needs new revenue while the other pretends that it is not and does not.
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:10 am
I am sure the Speaker was fully aware of the irony relating to the two shortfalls in the same presentation. I also suspect that the Democrat budget he presented represents the perspectives of the appropriation chairs on the level of cuts sustainable without excessive harm being done or promises broken.
I still have not seen a Democrat k-12 education appropriation bill posted to either the House or the Senate. One would assume since the Governor has called for a small increase his basic bill could be passed on a bipartisan basis. What is the hold up?
Comment by Rod Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:11 am
Well, definitely putting lipstick on a pig here, but shorting the pensions $2.2 billion today costs taxpayers over $15 billion over the life of the funding schedule, so you could argue Madigan is being a bit less reckless? Also, the Governor still has his constitutional authority to line item or reduction veto nearly whatever he wants.
Comment by Juice Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:12 am
@ One of the 35 - Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:08 am:
=Posturing again, instead of governing. When will Illinois get elected officials who do the right thing, instead of what is politically expedient for themselves? =
As soon as the voters demand that we pay for the services that we want. the voters don’t reward honesty ie. for to many years we have provided services without paying for them by using pension dollars. You see how well that worked, so we are raising taxes to fix the structural deficit so that we have the services and pay for them. The voters don’t like that so the politicians are having to play these games to figure out a way pay for the services that deep down we need/want and still pay for them. The spend the pension dollars scheme has ran its course.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:14 am
Reckless is proposing a budget requiring new revenue and refusing to figure out how to get it.
Comment by Liberty Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:15 am
If Rauner, MJM and Cullerton held a press conference it would resemble a comedy skit by the Three Stooges with finger pointing, insults and such. Not a good idea but it would be entertaining.
Comment by Ginhouse Tommy Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:16 am
Mixing “non-budget issues” as Gov Rauner wants to do is not standard practice. However, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to negotiate increased revenues in exchange for long-term economic benefit for the state.
Comment by Soccertease Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:17 am
The Republicans are calling Madigan’s proposed budget “insane”, yet they were silent when Rauner proposed his “reckless” solution.
The hypocrisy exists on both sides of the aisle.
Comment by Wensicia Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:17 am
Communicating to the public and “communicating” to politicians are two entirely different things, and both equally important. Perhaps Speaker Madigan is doing a better job at the latter than the former.
Comment by CharlieKratos Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:18 am
I think we all know who the problem in IL has been and continues to be.
Comment by anon Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:18 am
Rod: You’re making too much sense.
They need to have some significant wrestling on the other budget numbers before they arrive at the same place. And the “turnaround agenda” of non-budget items, is the bigger hang up.
Comment by walker Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:19 am
It is just too bad that our state’s most prominent newspapers fail to grasp these points.
It is also too bad that they do not seem to grasp that Rauner has yet to lead with his own proposal.
From Day 1, Rauner wanted the Dems to propose the tax increase.
All the Dems have really done is reprioritize spending. And they have put forth an honest proposal that ensures pension payments will be made.
And Madigan gets criticized for that.
It is sad to see the disingenuous ramblings of the Trib.
Comment by Austin Blvd Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:25 am
Hey Mike, you can’t have a budget that relies on more revenue that doesn’t exist, despite last year’s awful budget. I want to support the dems doing their own budget, but if it is going to be more outta whack than a Rauner budget, then I can’t. Stop foolin’round.
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:25 am
“Mixing ‘non-budget issues’ as Gov Rauner wants to do is not standard practice.”
Rich Miller:
https://capitolfax.com/2015/05/26/question-of-the-day-2049/
Just sayin’…
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:25 am
I guess Matt Dietrich didn’t read either of these proposed budgets if he thinks they are basically the same.
Let’s examine Rauner’s budget. It cut more than $400 million from higher education, $1 billion from healthcare, $600 million from human services, economic development spending was cut by one-third, and employee healthcare was cut by almost $900 million. After all that, he still included the illegal pension cuts totaling more than $2.3 billion.
I’d say that was reckless and woefully unbalanced. The Democrats budget is certainly unbalanced so far, but rejects the draconian and mean-spirited cuts made by Rauner and Donna Arduin. So while they are both unbalanced, only one is reckless and heartless, and that’s the one Rauner proposed that Durkin and Radogno vowed to sponsor.
That’s the choice that is before the General Assembly this week, and that’s why the outcome is all but assured. Not even the Republicans would vote for Rauner’s budget, so their complaints are just so much background noise.
Madigan and Cullerton are laying out the spending plan. The revenue side is where it’s going to be tricky and where the rubber will meet the road.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:27 am
Rauner says revenue with reforms, apparently 3.5 billion
Madigan says work with the Governor to get the money but apparently no reforms or anything Rauner wants
Exactly how is that working with the Governor? Sounds more like dictating the terms, no collaboration
Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:27 am
They aren’t really the same. One relies on a solution that could actually be achieved in this fiscal year through legislation.
Comment by Neveranonymous Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:30 am
There is NOT one “budget” out there that any side, or any detractor, coukd point to and say that it’s balanced, or even less than phony.
Pot/Kettle indeed…
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:33 am
Sorry Matt. This is for Madeline:
http://www2.illinois.gov/gov/budget/Documents/Budget%20Book/Budget%20Book%20FY16/FY2016IllinoisOperatingBudgetBook.pdf
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:37 am
Made this exact point during Madigan’s press conference…
Plus Rauner’s budget proposal was made back in February, this is what Madigans come up with at the end of May?
Comment by Nony Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:38 am
It would make them all bad at math.
Comment by BIG R. Ph. Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:40 am
=== There is NOT one “budget” out there that any side, or any detractor, coukd point to and say that it’s balanced, or even less than phony. ===
Pot/Kettle indeed…
I’d call it business as usual, for both sides of the aisle.
Comment by thunderspirit Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:46 am
Haven’t seen this & don’t have time to research - would madagan’s budget work if the income tax was back at 5%? Is it missing funding to any major areas? Just curious.
Comment by Patty Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:53 am
==the Governor has the last word==
He does. He is also smarter than allowing himself to be tagged as solely responsible for the cuts this would try dumping in his lap.
More likely he vetoes such a budget outright and aggressively makes the public case that the ILGA has again failed to do their job by failing to send him a balanced budget.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:53 am
It would have all been perfectly reasonable if the Democrats had done the responsible thing and extended the five percent income tax in the lame duck session, when they had the chance. As it is, they’ve opened the door for disaster capitalism to take Illinois down to the level of Mississippi or Puerto Rico.
Even at five percent, there were still serious decisions to be made. But at 3.75, the situation we’re in is ludicrous. Ideally we’d move to a modern revenue system with a progressive income tax and modest but balanced sales and property taxes, but trust in government here is so shot now that quite likely we’ll have to destroy before we can rebuild. And oftentimes the destruction sticks, and the rebuilding never happens.
Comment by Angry Chicagoan Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:53 am
Amazing how many people like to play dumb on this latest budget proposition. It’s not like Madigan et al didn’t figure out the math, or haven’t clearly presented their preferred plan.
Everyone knows that the Dem position is this is our final spending plan, and we expect $3.5B more in tax revenues to balance. That’s what Madigan openly acknowledged and announced.
Rauner’s position is less clear, because he seems willing to close his own budget proposal’s $3.1B gap with new tax revenues, plus some more cuts as yet undisclosed, provided he gets movement on non-budget items.
The spending still needs some work to reach agreement, but the real issue is about taking joint responsibility for the taxes required to make either budget proposition work. And taking joint responsibility for the taxes, including some votes from both sides of the aisle, is going to require some claimed progress for the Governor on his turnaround agenda.
Comment by walker Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 12:06 pm
===- Angry Chicagoan - Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 11:53 am:
It would have all been perfectly reasonable if the Democrats had done the responsible thing and extended the five percent income tax in the lame duck session, when they had the chance====
They allowed the “temporary” tax to lapse at the specific request if the incoming governor. You can’t pilory them one moment, and expect them to do your heavy lifting the next.
Comment by West Sider Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 12:07 pm
Too say the ReBooters are makin’ sense is like sayin’ BVR is a man of peace —- neither are true
The key differences
the Dem spending plan publicly state the need for additional Team Peace hides behind phony pension savings
The Dem plans does not harm middle class families, cripple cities, crush the hopes of college students and bring chaos to every segment of the health care system
Gov. Peace thinks those people are just stepping stones on the road to West Indiana
Comment by Anonin' Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 12:13 pm
Walker, that’s about how I see it.
Rauner put a lot of his own money into the campaign. But he also got a lot of money from people around the country who dig his anti-union message.
He has to at least produce some sturm und drang for them, even if there’s no way he can deliver on the agenda.
And despite his rhetoric, the governior has already tipped his hand that he wants new revenue through his actions: the FY15 sweeps, the unbalanced FY16 proposal, and his reported behind-closed-door comments in the $3.5 billion range.
He needs an out, though, a way to declare victory. No one could take the humiliation of spending all that money, and running that campaign, and come up snake eyes before signing a tax increase.
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 12:21 pm
The Speaker may have over-played his hand this time, at least if public opinion counts for anything. Joe lunch pail understands over-spending. It can’t be obscured with smoke, mirrors, or double talk. Is est quis is est………it is what it is.
Comment by Keyser Soze Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 12:24 pm
Describing the crux of that matter that eludes Madeleine:
=== The difference is one admits that his proposal is out of whack and needs new revenue while the other pretends that it is not and does not. — Wordslinger ===
=== The Democrats budget is certainly unbalanced so far, but rejects the draconian and mean-spirited cuts made by Rauner and Donna Arduin. So while they are both unbalanced, only one is reckless and heartless, and that’s the one Rauner proposed that Durkin and Radogno vowed to sponsor. — 4th Ward ===
Comment by nona Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 12:40 pm
I go back to Wordslinger’s original point. While they are the same thing on paper, the fact that Madigan owns that it is out of whack and backs new revenue is light years from Rauner’s public positioning.
Comment by Montrose Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 12:40 pm
To paraphrase a famous police detective: Welcome to the party Madeline.
Hypocrisy is an occupational hazard for our elected officials. The trick is to be convincing enough in your presentation that the voters will not notice the hypocrisy.
Comment by Norseman Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 12:40 pm
Didn’t the Speaker call his a “spending plan”, not a “budget”? Big difference.
Comment by Filmmaker Professor Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 12:43 pm
If folks love liberty, then let’s welcome the opportunity to reduce state spending by three billion. Illinois government is too big and Bruce Rauner is committed to rightsizing Illinois. After the downsizing, the citizens can demand that their tax dollars be stretched by eliminating prevailing wage mandates and project labor agreements for example.
Comment by Muscular Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 12:50 pm
===… citizens can demand that their tax dollars be stretched by eliminating prevailing wage mandates and project labor agreements for example.===
When you take a 10% pay cut, and you send it to me, just because, I’ll agree with you.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 12:55 pm
what is defined as Illinois government “too big”. In 2014 Key Policy Data Illinois has the 6th lowest state and local government employment ratio in the country”- See more at: http://www.keypolicydata.com/blog-archives/illinoiss-government-workforce-twentieth-most-productive-2012/#sthash.ZfSOc3Yp.dpuf and Governing.com has us at 46th lowest in the nation for government employees. It is not the number of employees that is affecting this, it is more about what the government spends with the money often not going to the cost of employing people but rather to many other entities. More savings will be found at special projects, taxes, etc than in the focusing on the employees.
Comment by illinifan Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 1:06 pm
Muscular: We all love Liberty. Therefore all respect to you.
We might disagree, however, with the simple equation that smaller government automatically equates to more Liberty.
What might be worth pondering, in round numbers, is that we started with a $6B gap driven primarily by lower taxes. Both sides have already identified cuts to operational spending of $3B or more. You are now asking for another $3B in more cuts. At what point do we say, OK that’s enough for now? Or is it a never ending demand for less?
Comment by walker Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 1:09 pm
==But at 3.75, the situation we’re in is ludicrous.==
Where we you when the tax rate was 3% for 20 years? If you’re going to use Spaceballs units of measurement and label 3.75 as ludicrous, then 3% was plaid.
Comment by nixit71 Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 1:22 pm
===Where we you when the tax rate was 3% for 20 years? ===
Yeah, and do you know what the state’s required pension payments were back then?
Don’t be a moron.
I’m not saying you are a moron, I’m just saying don’t be one.
OK?
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 1:26 pm
Based on his past work, it’s hyprocritical for Madigan to call someone else’s unbalanced budget reckless. But this budget is a whole different matter. Rauner wants to use the budget as leverage to make Dems vote for bills that hurt their core constituencies. Of course Madigan is trying to take that leverage away.
I don’t see how the Republicans “win” a shutdown when they have rejected the only plan that is out there and refuse to offer their own. I guess they’ll use the summer to hammer Dem targets with Rauner’s $34 million and the editorial pages, believing that when Madigan feels like he’s in actual danger of losing them, he’ll start compromising.
Comment by Century Club Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 1:27 pm
It is important to understand the errors of the past in order to posture reforms that can work going forward. One understanding is fiscal responsibility to the taxpayers and bondholders; responsibility to the people who pay for things.
Yes, as presented there is currently a $4 billion hole and it is up to the legislature and governor to fill it in a way that does not come back to haunt.
In 2011 new employees under the state’s retirement systems have a Tier II plan. Recognizing that the government and the unions changed the plan about 10-15 years too late, the 2015 version of reform is to recognize that the existing Tier I pension plan is worth more now than it was 20 years ago and to charge the current participants more for it accordingly. Negotiation with the unions has been invisible, if at all, during this process and yet it is essential.
The other parts to filling the hole are to cut budgeted expenses $1-2 million more and to tax the taxpayers for the rest in order to decrease the bondholder risk.
Comment by Note from a taxpayer Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 1:29 pm
Bingo Walk:
==Rauner’s position is less clear, because he seems willing to close his own budget proposal’s $3.1B gap with new tax revenues, plus some more cuts as yet undisclosed, provided he gets movement on non-budget items.===
It appears there is one budget (hole) that the one person who is capable of filling the hole has presented and one where no such capability exists. That’s an important distinguishing factor.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 1:34 pm
==So while they are both unbalanced, only one is reckless and heartless, and that’s the one Rauner proposed that Durkin and Radogno vowed to sponsor.==
Won’t a budget that promises continued services with no means of funding always be less “reckless and heartless” than just not offering the service at all? Not really a fair comparison.
I’m reminded of the old “Seinfeld” episode where Jerry went to pickup the rental car he reserved but was not available: “You see, you know how to *take* the reservation, you just don’t know how to *hold* the reservation. And that’s really the most important part of the reservation: the holding. Anybody can just take them.”
Anyone can offer a service. Someone has to pay for it.
Comment by nixit71 Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 1:36 pm
===Not really a fair comparison.===
Sure it is. They are both unbalanced, but only one slashes healthcare for the poor, makes huge cuts to human services and shorts the pension funds. Madigan didn’t call Rauner’s budget reckless because it wasn’t in balance, it was reckless because the cuts it contained would hurt a lot of people.
Can you understand the difference?
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 1:43 pm
Guy, who is this “one person” you speak of able to fill budget holes single-handedly?
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 1:55 pm
When a Republican spouts nonsense, it’s an attempt to harm minorities and the poor. But when a democrat spouts even bigger nonsense, it’s somehow working to help minorities and the poor. Hummmmm….makes ya think.
Comment by just a citizen Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 2:00 pm
I think the Illinois voting public are so ignorant of what is occurring with the budget that it doesn’t matter what was said in the past. It is how Madigan frames it now. I doubt you will be seeing this comparison on the front page of the paper. It will be: Madigan passes budget, Governor Rauner vetoes!
Comment by Dudeman Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 2:03 pm
== the fact that Madigan owns that it is out of whack and backs new revenue is light years from Rauner’s public positioning. == Exactly right!
Also, Madigan is not holding the budget hostage to a turnaround agenda designed to help the very wealthy but make life more difficult for the middle class.
Comment by Enviro Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 2:07 pm
if the state had always paid the actuarial required pension payment, they would be budgeting about 2B instead of 7B. That extra 5B would fill the current budget whole. You can pay me now, or pay me later.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 2:13 pm
=== Wordslinger - Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 1:55 pm:
Guy, who is this “one person” you speak of able to fill budget holes single-handedly?===
That would be the Governor. His name is Bruce Rauner. He was elected without your help and despite your hindrance. The record demonstrates you despise him. It also demonstrates that he doesn’t care about that.
It’s not a single-handed effort, but as you have alluded to in past posts, he’s the one who (showed his hand too early) can sign a budget that includes revenue increases. He’s stated he won’t do that until some other measures have been accepted. That happens in Government when the parties share power. It’s been a while. One would assume he would be open to new revenue with the budget he created. One could also assume he won’t be so anxious to do so with a budget foisted upon him by the majority in the GA.
But, I knew you already knew the answer to this. So have at it. Dazzle me.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 2:33 pm
I attempted to make this point yesterday but didn’t do a very good job of it.
Just a citizen at 2:00 p.m. makes a similar point I also agree with.
Comment by Just Me Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 2:35 pm
Guy, just so you’re clear, there is no one person who can single-handedly raise revenue.
And do yourself a favor, try to stick to tne grown up issues, and not get hung up so much on speculating as to “who likes whom” and “who hates whom.”
Tnis ain’t a “Tiger Beat” blog.
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 2:41 pm
So, Madigan works to have passed legislation “reforming” the state pensions, promotes same as constitutional, and yet claims that savings Rauner is counting on based on the ILSC affirming the law is reckless.
Makes sense to me.
Comment by dupage dan Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 2:49 pm
==It also demonstrates that he doesn’t care about that.==
I’m not sure exactly what the Governor cares about. From what I’ve seen he certainly doesn’t care who he has to hurt in order to achieve his goals. He certainly is using his business skills well in that area. You don’t make hundreds of millions of dollars by caring about people.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 3:04 pm
To be “fair and balanced” I’d add that I don’t think any of the powers that be particularly care about the harm that could be done to individuals if they continue with their brinksmanship.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 3:09 pm
Du Page Dan: You know better than that. The projected savings from Madigan’s passed pension reform bill were not included in the budget, pending legal review. Rauner included his pension savings in his budget before he even had a bill.
Comment by walker Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 4:11 pm
===Du Page Dan: You know better than that.===
Apparently not.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, May 27, 15 @ 4:15 pm
This is not the first time the Speaker has knowingly passed an unbalanced budget. Remember a few years ago when he approached the press box and admitted the budget wasn’t balanced but that he didn’t care?
Comment by Just Me Thursday, May 28, 15 @ 12:58 am