Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Um, you can’t do that

Posted in:

Illinois

Gov. Bruce Rauner is combining several of his proposals into one bill, but that doesn’t seem to sway Democrats opposed to parts of his agenda.

Rauner’s consolidated legislation includes some old items (a property tax freeze, allowing local governments to limit collective bargaining and opt out of prevailing wage laws) and some new additions (allowing schools to use outside contractors for certain services, increased funding for impoverished school districts).

“I believe this is the single most important piece of legislation which we can pass this year,” Rauner said.

One bill is how Rauner would prefer it remain, as he called on House Speaker Michael Madigan not to try to separate the proposals.

“I’m asking the Speaker not to break the bill apart into little pieces, not to call sham votes on individual pieces. Debate the bill in its entirety and vote on the bill in its entirety,” Rauner said.

* From the Illinois Constitution…

Bills, except bills for appropriations and for the codification, revision or rearrangement of laws, shall be confined to one subject. Appropriation bills shall be limited to the subject of appropriations.

We’ll talk more about the substance of the governor’s proposals later, but if you click here for the governor’s bill summary, you’ll see he appears to have illegally mixed in an appropriation and has combined several quite different subject matters together.

They want “one bill, one vote” so they can get the Democrats on record as being opposed to some of the bill’s more popular items, like a property tax freeze and (for Chicagoans) more money for CPS, or perhaps peel some Democrats away from their leaders.

But if they passed a law like this it would probably be shot down pretty quickly in the courts.

posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 9:50 am

Comments

The governor is ignoring the Illinois Constitution? I am shocked. Simply shocked!

Comment by ash Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 9:53 am
The way around this is to include the “If any only if HB XXXX” passes” language. The Speaker invented that trick, he can use it again.

Comment by Not it Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 9:53 am
Are you gonna let a little thing like the Illinois Constitution get in the way of the “Turnaround” Agenda?

Comment by 3rd Party Needed Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 9:54 am
Amateur Hour.

Comment by Tommydanger Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 9:55 am
Superstars don’t need to read the constitution.

Comment by Abe the Babe Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 9:55 am
For crying out loud, it’s late August, get in the ball game.

Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 9:59 am
I can understand how Governor Rauner and Richard Goldberg wouldn’t know about the single-subject clause, but wouldn’t you think Durkin or Radogno might have clued them in?

Which is worse: that Rauner doesn’t know this is illegal, or that he doesn’t care that it’s illegal?

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 9:59 am
That damn Constitution thingy always seems to get in the way…..

Comment by Stones Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:00 am
It’s been 8 months.

Does the Legislative Shop have “a single CLUE” at all about how legislation works, the understanding of 60 and 30, and what’s most sad and pathetic, the skill to work within the parameters of divided government?

These are fundamental errors, ones we mock here when we all chastise “dorm room” mentality.

Professionals, not by pay but by skill, they KNOW the single subject “rule” bedrock, legislatively.

At some point, it’s just embarrassing how Rauner’s Crew just plain “lacks”.

The flip side?

If all this is a “win the day” press play type of maneuver, what does it say about a Press Shop pushing and promoting something so completely unlikely or possible to make Bruce Rauner look, “engaged”. It doesn’t get more sad in messaging than that.

Bruce Rauner has failed, but looking at the “assistance” Gov. Rauner has had in the Press and Legislative Shops, the only way Rauner could succeed with these moves would be by accident, not by design.

Either learn the Legislative Processes, Legislative Shop, or move on to just using bricks as before, and double-crossing GOP GA members. You got that move down cold. Don’t worry too much, I can’t wait for “ck” to remind us all the Single Subject “criteria” is a tool of “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls” as cover.

Embarrassingly sad.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:01 am
==Which is worse: that Rauner doesn’t know this is illegal, or that he doesn’t care that it’s illegal?==

Both are pretty disappointing. What can you expect from the Goldberg crew?

But not to worry, we are only a few more snarky letters away from breaking this impasse.

Just remember that.

Comment by Abe the Babe Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:03 am
Either the Governor simply doesn’t care and insists on operating as if he were the CEO of a company and gets to do what he wants and he ordered his staff to do it this way, or his legislative and legal team is completely incompetent. Neither scenario is good.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:04 am
The Constitution matters to lawmakers, except when it doesn’t.

Comment by Tournaround Agenda Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:06 am
Legal…not legal…who cares? Rauner doesn’t seem to care about how many face palms he can rack up during his reign of error.

Comment by ihpsdm Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:07 am
Some parts of the Illinois Constitution are enforceable, some are not. Some we choose not to enforce.

Which part is which depends on who you ask and when you ask them.

Comment by Anon Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:08 am
He knows exactly what he is doing.

Comment by AnonymousOne Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:09 am
I’m pretty sure the way to fix this is to just buy a new constitution.

Comment by The Captain Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:10 am
Selective interpretation of the Illinois Constitution is an Indy special. If it helps their rhetoric, use it. If it hurts, ignore it.

Relax. One of the privileges of the majority is controlling what gets voted upon. This is just a waste of superstaffer time. Then again, I’m sure what else they’re spending their time doing. Certainly isn’t governing.

Now repeat stress relief mantra nos. 29, “It’s not the end of the world.”

http://alwayswellwithin.com/2014/10/12/calm-stress-response/

Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:10 am
===He knows exactly what he is doing.===

Ok, what is he doing?

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:10 am
Agreed that this violates “single subject.” But doesn’t Cullerton’s prop tax freeze/CPS pension pick up/school funding formula bill have similar issues?

Comment by Richard Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:10 am
=He knows exactly what he is doing.=

Ha!

Comment by chi Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:18 am
The unconstitutionality does not matter if there are insufficient votes to pass.
It seems that he called for an up or down vote. Why would the Dems not agree to put it on the floor and vote it down? That let’s them say that they gave his bill a chance, but it is not what the elected leaders, representing their voters, were willing to pass.
Now let’s talk budget — up or down…..

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:20 am
It’s only unconstitutional when Madigan does it, like with the budget. Besides, he thinks he can do whatever he wants, until the courts stop him.

Comment by Wensicia Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:20 am
wouldn’t Durkin and Radogno clued him in…..I understand conversations with Republican leaders is limited which is part of the problem with the new governor. He currently tells people what he wants, he needs to take a few minutes to actually listen to strategies on how to get what he wants.

Comment by illlinifan Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:22 am
The Governor’s afraid that if the pieces were broken into individual parts some of them might pass. Then what’s he do? Veto the individual bills because they are a “sham” because he didn’t get everything he wanted? It puts him in a bind if some, but not all of his demands are passed.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:24 am
===The unconstitutionality does not matter if there are insufficient votes to pass.

It seems that he called for an up or down vote. Why would the Dems not agree to put it on the floor and vote it down?===

You put a think on how your first sentence and your second sentence makes no sense. At all.

Why go thru the motions to vote down something when it’sore powerful to show how completely inept the governor actually is and make him and his Legislative Crew actually do real legislative work.

Again, this isn’t dorm room. Promoting a vote like this by the governor runs square into the hypocrisy Rauner complains about with “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls…”

Learn and follow the processes or just be a mason and put bricks in things to diminish the GOP GA.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:26 am
Have any of them even read the Illinois Constitution?

Comment by Aldyth Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:27 am
illinifan, communications with Durkin and Radogno are probably limited to the orders for the day. Here’s what you vote against and here is today’s rhetorical message.

As for the bill. It took Rauner almost 6 months to produce any turnaround bill. Now that they’ve found LRB, they’re having fun.

Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:27 am
Capt Fax
While you were out for the tune up TeamBungle told,the House that the Supremacy Clause was a nuisance so single subject is just for non multi taskers

Comment by Anonin' Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:28 am
I’m sure if its unconstitutional the AG will be all over it quicker than you can say jack robinson.

Comment by Foster brooks Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:30 am
Governor Gestalt asks Madigan “not to call sham votes on individual pieces” while failing to understand that, thanks to federal match dollars, the budget hole he helped create is truly greater than the sum of its parts.

Comment by AC Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:36 am
On on level I would love for the bill to pass, I look forward to seeing Goldberg correspond with the justices. Can you imagine? But on a serious level, the legislative shop hasn’t run any of the turnaround agenda yet, but holds the budget hostage to it. Raunder has tried to leverage concensus on some patently unpalatable ideas and eventually needs to face the idea that the votes simply arent there. The GA might be willing to horse trade on agenda item but not the whole enchilada.

Comment by relocated Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:40 am
Constitution does not matter. Madigan put an unconstitutional question on the ballot about raising the income tax on millionaires. It passed overwhelmingly, but problem is IL Const. expresses states that income taxes will be levied at a flat percent.

Comment by Impair Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:44 am
==Does the Legislative Shop have “a single CLUE” at all about how legislation works, the understanding of 60 and 30, and what’s most sad and pathetic, the skill to work within the parameters of divided government?==

A surprising number of LLs are Pat Quinn holdovers. Draw the conclusion that you like best from that.

To the post, I’m not sure how much additional danger there is in Democrats voting this down. Rauner can, and probably will, say they’re against the popular stuff no matter what.

Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:46 am
Richard, a property tax freeze for school districts, a change in the pension funding for school districts and a change in state funding to school districts are pretty obviously a single subject - school finances.

Was that just a cheap shot at Pres. Cullerton?

You know, this isn’t just made up, rhetorical stuff. The Illinois Supreme Court has actually interpreted the single subject clause and knocked out legislation that violated it.

Comment by Rasselas Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:47 am
Ok GOP legislators, time for you to stand up. You took an oath swearing to uphold the constitution. Time to earn that. Vote No and say why. return your checks to the Rauner PAC. FYI Republican voter here.

Comment by Thoughts Matter Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:47 am
===Madigan put an unconstitutional question on the ballot about raising the income tax on millionaires. It passed overwhelmingly,===

You do know the difference in the Single-Subject Clause in the legislative process and a non-binding referendum, right?

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:48 am
And, Impair, you’re no better. The Madigan referendum on a millionaire’s tax was a non-binding advisory referendum. Non-binding referenda are perfectly legal. The obvious next step was for 3/5 of the legislators to vote for a constitutional amendment, in order to implement the will of the people. That hasn’t happened. You know why, right?

Comment by Rasselas Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:49 am
“He knows exactly what he is doing.”

Yes he has the General Assembly right where they want him.

Comment by Nick Name Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:50 am
===A surprising number of LLs are Pat Quinn holdovers. Draw the conclusion that you like best from that.===

… and just think - Arsenal -, Goldberg is driving them too.

This might be the case to the chefs and sous chefs lack the ability to even cook.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:51 am
“um, you cant do that.” Exactly. The most disconcerting thing is that we are this deep into the muck, and there was no one in the war room w the knowledge to say so, and heft to make it matter. In rauners former world they call it “due dilligence.”

Comment by Langhorne Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 10:53 am
===He knows exactly what he is doing.===

The people also know exactly what he is doing,
and they don’t like it.

He is trying to reduce the wages and standard of living for the middle class to further enrich the corporate class.

Comment by Enviro Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 11:05 am
== Rasselas ==

No cheap shot intended (I kinda like that Cullerton bill,) just posing the question, that’s all. And by the way, there’s is also an element of that bill that deals with police and fire pensions, so I’m not sure it would meet the single-subject test as a school finance bill. After my initial post, it occurred to me that it could be defended as single-subject by arguing all the elements are in some way connected to property taxes, but I’m not sure.

Comment by Richard Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 11:07 am
Only the absolutely necessary minimum will be done until it is time for the 2016 elections; at that point the citizens will have their opportunity to show their support/opposition to all involved parties.

Comment by Buzzie Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 11:12 am
Governor Rauner sees value in the parts of a whole. He got rich finding buyers for those parts. Naturally, he believes that he can roll up parts he values and sell the entire adulterated result to the public.

Rauner knows that people dependent upon an new acquisition of his, wouldn’t have allowed him to acquire them if they knew that he didn’t intend to save them at all.

His campaign was all about telling voters what he needed to say, convincing them that he was going to help them, while the entire time he knew they wouldn’t support him if they really knew his plans.

What was amazing to me was how quickly Rauner tore down his campaign façade after the inauguration. He literally threw many of his core campaign statements into a shredder.

He believes that after he is finished with you, you will thank him for not listening to you, lying to you, and then support him. His “hit them hard and fast” way of doing things is supposed to deliver the goods and shorten those hard times he believes we need him to subject us to.

Bruce Rauner is not a politician. He doesn’t compromise unless forced to. As long as he smells smoke, but doesn’t feel any heat - he believes he must be doing something good for you.

Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 11:19 am
He knows exactly what he is doing was in absolutely NO way a defense of this behavior. Rauner is bundling issues to create a stalemate and the longer it goes on, the pressure on the legislature -and everyone else- mounts. He really doesn’t care how bad things get, he wants his anti-union stuff to pass however he has to package it. Constitution be damned. He is used to getting what he wants, even if he has to pay for it. So it’ll be a long, drawn out, bitter resolve. He’s not hurting, is he? After all, as he’d say, this is why he was elected—-to shake it up /sssss! I think he actually might be considering just buying a new constituion, as someone mentioned above. /s

Comment by AnonymousOne Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 11:24 am
Still waiting to catch a glimpse of the brilliance of this Goldberg fellow. Maybe next he can propose a bill that includes right to work along with free pony rides. No one is voting against that one.

Comment by Daniel Plainview Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 11:36 am
New State Constitutions (written to Order)… half price through the month of December…Contact the law firm of Dewey, Cheatum & Howe.

* (Court costs not included)

Comment by Anonymous Redux Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 11:38 am
Sigh … still acting like a CEO who can just order things done … and apparently still surrounded by a bunch of yes men who are afraid to tell him the truth about how things actually get done.

Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 11:44 am
For perspective, leaving aside the unconstitutionality of Rauner’s proposal, most famous compromises from the mythologized days of the early Congress were actually a package of bills with different coalitions supporting each bill while agreeing to the overall compromise. This gives legislators cover to say I voted for X, but against Y. Worked then, works today.

Comment by Precinct Captain Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 11:50 am
The Legislative Shop is probably staggering their lunch hours so they can go out and find unique IP addresses and lob their fly-by comments on this blog. “He knows exactly what he is doing.” My god, if that “thought” ended in something about taxpayers, it would be Goldberg for sure. They need to think of better nicknames. Maybe they can use the names of DC pols, since that is what they all “know,” which also explains why the Illinois single subject rule wasn’t at all on their radar.

Comment by Gentlemen, behold! Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 11:59 am
Anon. @ 10:08 am ==Some parts of the Illinois Constitution are enforceable, some are not. Some we choose not to enforce.

Which part is which depends on who you ask and when you ask them==

Single subject has been enforced numerous times, and anyone hurt by the bill could bring suit to challenge it. E.g., someone who gets paid less than the prevailing wage, as allowed under the new bill, could sue for the difference. And one successful challenge throws the whole bill out.

Comment by Anon. Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 12:03 pm
Wouldn’t Illinois not following the federal prevailing wage laws then rule out any federal grants, loans, ins. etc. for those Illinois projects?

“The Davis-Bacon and Related Acts, apply to contractors and subcontractors performing on federally funded or assisted contracts in excess of $2,000 for the construction, alteration, or repair (including painting and decorating) of public buildings or public works. Davis-Bacon Act and Related Act contractors and subcontractors must pay their laborers and mechanics employed under the contract no less than the locally prevailing wages and fringe benefits for corresponding work on similar projects in the area. The Davis-Bacon Act directs the Department of Labor to determine such locally prevailing wage rates. The Davis-Bacon Act applies to contractors and subcontractors performing work on federal or District of Columbia contracts. The Davis-Bacon Act prevailing wage provisions apply to the “Related Acts,” under which federal agencies assist construction projects through grants, loans, loan guarantees, and insurance.”
-from U.S. Dept. of Labor

Comment by Joe M Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 1:12 pm
===
For perspective, leaving aside the unconstitutionality of Rauner’s proposal, most famous compromises from the mythologized days of the early Congress were actually a package of bills with different coalitions supporting each bill while agreeing to the overall compromise. This gives legislators cover to say I voted for X, but against Y. Worked then, works today===

That only works when you can pass X and Y. If X is a bill to kill unions, then X won’t get 71 votes in IL House no matter how many votes Y gets. That’s why Rauner wants one vote. Break it into multiple votes and all his anti Union provisions go down in flames.

Comment by MurMan Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 1:18 pm
As Minority Leader Radogno might say, because it is just an introduced bill. You can’t take it seriously.

Comment by Austin Blvd Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 1:45 pm
Who says anyone has to vote on any of it? Just assign it to a committee and wait for it to die.

Comment by Skeptic Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 1:57 pm
> Single subject has been enforced numerous times

Cite? Not dogging you, just want to edjumakate myself on said topic.

Comment by Anon #43 Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 2:14 pm
- Anon #43 -

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=f5aabf6c-be79-4096-aac1-dfc5dfc32807

The Google is your friend, k?

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 3:47 pm
== Um, you can’t do that ==

Hey, Raunner hires the ‘best of the bunch’ and says he has to pay them that way; to get the ‘best’?

‘Best’? Maybe Raunner’s idea of minimum wage would be more appropriate for his level of ’staff’.

Maybe $5 per hour about right?

Comment by sal-says Tuesday, Aug 18, 15 @ 5:47 pm