Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: AFSCME files suit to stop Rauner from imposing his final contract offer
Next Post: Caption contest!
Posted in:
* Senate President John Cullerton emerged from the leaders meeting today to deny that the Democrats had ever agreed to do a pension reform deal in exchange for a $215 million appropriation for Chicago Public Schools.
“We haven’t talked about putting those two things together,” Cullerton said, even though it was widely reported that a deal had, in fact, been made back in June.
Cullerton said the governor told the leaders today that he wasn’t going to sign the CPS funding bill.
“The governor indicated that he thought before he would sign that he wanted to have some pension reform,” Cullerton said. “That was the governor’s insistence. We passed the bill and put it on his desk, so I would urge him to sign it. If he’s not going to sign it because he wants something else, he hasn’t told us what that is yet.”
“To me, it’s just semantics,” Cullerton said. “Things aren’t tied together.”
However, House GOP Leader Jim Durkin told reporters that it is “disappointing that they’ve walked away from the deal we had in that room last June regarding the Chicago Public Schools and the $200 million in exchange for a pension reform bill to be completed by the end of this General Assembly. They’ve gone back on it… They’re not interested in pension reform, they’re more interested in stopgap.”
Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno agreed with Durkin’s take.
* Meanwhile, Speaker Madigan told reporters that he was available to meet over the weekend with the other leaders, but not on Friday or Monday.
Madigan also shot back at the governor’s claim that he demanded a stopgap budget.
“I did not suggest a stopgap budget,” Madigan said. “The idea of a stopgap budget originated with the governor or his people.”
“The word stopgap was never used,” Madigan said. “I’m suggesting a budget. I’m suggesting a budget. There was very little discussion about budget-making today.” He didn’t specify what those other topics were.
But Leader Radogno said, “It’s all semantics whether you call it an ‘unbalanced budget’ [or] a ’stopgap budget.’ What we need and what we’re committed to continue to work on is a balanced budget that will contain reforms.”
Senate President Cullerton waved off the entire issue. “A stopgap budget is what you would do if you couldn’t pass a balanced budget. I want to focus on passing a full budget,” he said.
* Asked about the latest glitches with the Exelon bill, with the Rauner administration claiming “poison pills” had been inserted, Speaker Madigan said “The governor’s administration says a lot of things.”
Speaking of which, here’s Crain’s…
Rauner also discovered a provision on prevailing wages that he accused archrival House Speaker Michael Madigan of inserting into the bill, this source said.
Madigan’s spokesman Steve Brown said the prevailing wage language has been in the legislation for months. “Once again, they’re grasping at straws and they’re not quite getting the grip,” he said.
* One positive (I suppose) development today, however, was that staff has been assigned to take a look at some reform and budget proposals.
*** UPDATE 1 *** Well, that didn’t take long. The governor has vetoed the CPS funding bill…
Governor Bruce Rauner took action today on the following bill:
Bill No.: SB 2822
An Act Concerning Public Employee Benefits
Action: VetoedVeto Message
To the Honorable Members ofThe Illinois Senate,
99th General Assembly:
Today I return Senate Bill 2822, which would give $215,000,000 to Chicago Public Schools without having reached agreement on comprehensive pension reforms for the State and local governments.
In June we agreed on a six-month funding bridge to a balanced budget with structural and economic reforms. Democrat leaders were clear at that time that an agreement to end the budget impasse was not possible before the election. Although disappointed, we came together to fund schools and critical government operations until legislative leaders were willing to reengage in serious, good faith negotiations.
As a precondition to funding schools statewide, Democrats proposed a $700 million State bailout of CPS. We eventually agreed to provide CPS with $215,000,000 – the estimated amount of its Fiscal Year 2017 employer normal pension cost – but only if we came together to pass comprehensive pension reform. Without reforms to solve our structural problems, taxpayer money would continue to be wasted on bailout after bailout.
The agreement was clear: Republicans supported Senate Bill 2822 only on condition that Democrats reengage in serious, good faith negotiations; and President Cullerton and Leader Radogno filed motions to reconsider the bill, which would keep the bill in the General Assembly until a pension reform agreement was reached.
The election is over. Despite my repeated request for daily negotiations and hope to reach a comprehensive agreement by the end of next week, we are no closer to ending the impasse or enacting pension reform. Still, President Cullerton withdrew his motion to reconsider the bill, ruled that Leader Radogno’s motion was inapplicable, and presented the bill to me for approval or veto – forcing me to take action. Then today, President Cullerton suddenly denied that the leaders had agreed that this bill would depend upon first enacting comprehensive pension reform. Breaking our agreement undermines our effort to end the budget impasse and enact reforms with bipartisan support.
The taxpayers of Illinois want a balanced budget. That can only be done if we address the structural imbalances that have bankrupted the State and CPS alike and drain resources that should be spent on other priorities, like improving schools and funding social services. The taxpayers of Illinois do not want just another bailout. Let’s get back to work to end the budget impasse and put Illinois on the right track once and for all.
Therefore, pursuant to Section 9(b) of Article IV of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return Senate Bill 2822 entitled “AN ACT concerning public employee benefits”, with the foregoing objections, vetoed in its entirety.
Sincerely,
Bruce Rauner
GOVERNOR
*** UPDATE 2 *** From the Illinois Constitution…
The house to which a bill is returned shall immediately enter the Governor’s objections upon its journal. If within 15 calendar days after such entry that house by a record vote of three-fifths of the members elected passes the bill, it shall be delivered immediately to the second house. If within 15 calendar days after such delivery the second house by a record vote of three-fifths of the members elected passes the bill, it shall become law.
The Senate has just journalized the veto. The clock now starts ticking, but today is the final scheduled day of veto session and scheduling another day during the holidays would be nearly impossible. So, the Senate and the House may have to vote on this today and there are attendance issues in both chambers. Plus, how do they put their targets on this thing, particularly since it likely can’t pass the House anyway? Stay tuned.
*** UPDATE 3 *** From Senate President Cullerton…
“Just this week I presented a pension reform model to the governor. I’m shocked and disappointed by his actions today. Chicago had taken steps to increase local responsibility and reform pensions. Two more pension system reforms are pending in the General Assembly. From where I stand, we were moving forward.
“The legislation that contained funding for Chicago schools was sent to the governor on Nov. 7. He had another month before he faced a deadline to act on it.
“By acting in such haste, the governor has unfortunately set back negotiations that I believed were advancing. Even worse, he has potentially forced the layoff of thousands of Chicago teachers and district employees.
“I don’t understand and am thoroughly disappointed in his short-sighted move.”
*** UPDATE 4 *** From the ILGOP…
Will Democrats Back the Chicago Bailout?
Time for House and Senate Democrats to Choose“Democratic leaders today broke their promise to enact statewide pension reform, and instead want to force a taxpayer funded bailout of Chicago Public Schools. House and Senate Democrats will have a clear choice to make – will they support the schools and taxpayers in their districts, or send a $215 million check to Chicago?” - Illinois Republican Party Spokesman Steven Yaffe
After Madigan and Cullerton reneged on their promise to pass pension reform, an agreement that would have freed up resources for Chicago schools, House and Senate Democrats will face their first big test.
Will they choose to recklessly bail out Chicago Public Schools, or will they stand with taxpayers who demand Springfield and the City of Chicago exercise fiscal sanity?
The taxpayers are watching.
*** UPDATE 5 *** Tribune…
Chicago Teachers Union President Karen Lewis said she wasn’t surprised by Rauner’s veto.
“He was never going to give us any money,” said Lewis, who has regularly slammed the Republican governor.
“He just lied about it. He’s a liar, he always has been,” she said Thursday. “He’s trying to starve CPS, that’s his goal.”
Rauner’s veto comes less than a week before the Chicago Board of Education is expected to take another vote on an annual operating budget that now exceeds $5.5 billion. The spending plan has to go through another vote to include tens of millions of dollars of new expenses related to the contract deal reached with CTU in October.
*** UPDATE 6 *** Here you go…
.@ChicagosMayor statement on Gov Rauner's veto of SB 2822 pic.twitter.com/Kx1Q6VHUIc
— Matt McGrath (@md_mcgrath) December 1, 2016
*** UPDATE 7 *** Verification was withdrawn…
Illinois Senate votes 36-16 to override Gov. Rauner's veto of CPS bill.
— Tina Sfondeles (@TinaSfon) December 1, 2016
On to the House, where the future is very iffy.
*** UPDATE 8 *** The House adjourned until January without a vote. It could conceivably come back in for a special session if a pension deal is done.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:13 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: AFSCME files suit to stop Rauner from imposing his final contract offer
Next Post: Caption contest!
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
This gamesmanship is getting tired. The citizens want something done, all of these politicians need to wake up, weasel words and coy phrasings are just excuses for never making progress on anything.
Comment by Stooges Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:19 am
Democrats need to address term limits and the property tax freeze. Saying no is not a good plan. How many current legislators really want to be around past 2028? God make take a couple before term limits do.
Comment by anon Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:21 am
=Saying no is not a good plan.=
Send that advice to Mitch McConnell.
Comment by MSIX Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:25 am
===Send that advice to Mitch McConnell===
McConnell’s base is different than Madigan’s. Dems generally want to see something done.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:27 am
Rich made the point yesterday that no legislative body imposed term limits on themselves, that element has come from the voters.
Now Illinois is going to be the “one”, with divided government, to take this and impose term limits with the governor of the opposite party of the majority part demanding it?
Yeah, um, ok… lol
Unless the “permanent” property tax freeze doesn’t have a labor poison pill for Democrats, then what exactly is Rauner aiming for with this? The goal has always been stripping labor’s prevailing wage and collective bargaining, not the property taxes.
How do I know?
When it was passed without labor language, Rauner called it a sham.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:27 am
The CPS pension deal, which was only for one year anyway, was not real. The Bond rating agencies and the Civic Federation saw through that immediately. Now its confirmed.
Comment by Rod Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:29 am
OW- “… what exactly is Rauner aiming for with this?”
Revenge, leverage, and, quite possibly, cashing in on the lower bonds ratings in the future. (no snark at all)
Comment by Anon221 Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:33 am
To the Veto…
Speaker Madigan and the Gubernatorial Vetoes he controls…
Rauner is a passenger by choice. Seeing Rauner as hamstrung by Speaker Madigan is willfully ignorant or blissfully unaware
Rauner, like other governors, can try to find 60/71 and 30/36… why won’t he?
And if we’re gonna say “Madigan can… ” … “baloney”… Rauner curtailed the 71 with Dunkin, a mythical 71 that never existed, and Rauner’s failed veto override record speaks for itself.
Rauner wants the 2012 pain, less K-12, and ensuring Diana’s group can get outside funding during this business decision.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:33 am
its not pension “reform”. Nothing is being reformed, please stop using that false description.
Its pension defunding. They want a bill to remove pensions funds so that they do not have to actually pay what is owed or replace funds that were raided/redirected in previous years. Just imagine if the gov demanded contracting reform, and as asking for a bill to not repay the backlog of bills under the guise of reforms
Comment by Ghost Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:35 am
=McConnell’s base is different than Madigan’s. Dems generally want to see something done.=
I was referring to principles. Saying no and gerrymandering is ok for the GOP on a federal level, but it’s a sin here? Very convenient for them.
Comment by MSIX Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:35 am
I expect updates from the Democrats, and the mayor both stating that there were never any links between this bill and pension reform. Get those PR machines cranked up, provide some succinct soundbytes for the evening newscast, and quit letting this lying governor get away with his particular form of baloney.
Comment by PublicServant Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:35 am
Ragnarok is underway.
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:36 am
If all local taxing bodies are capped - the pressure will really build on the unions that represent Public Works, Teacher, Fire and Police. The corporate authorities…the Villages,School Dists, Libraries and Park Districts now faced with zero revenue growth from property taxes will have to get serious about union negotiations.
Comment by Lech W Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:38 am
The IL SC has been pretty clear there is no legal “pension reform” left to do.
Math makes it clear that Tier 2 is the cheapest possible defined pension plan the State could have; it costs the State ZERO since it is entirely employee funded.
You could create a Tier 3 for new hires that is strictly a 401K type program but if the State offers any percentage of match, that costs more than Tier 2. Plus, with zero or minimal match, it is highly likely that the Tier 3 program would not qualify for the “Safe Harbor” and the State would have to enroll any new hires in Social Security, costing another roughly 8% more for teachers and other current “uncoordinated” employees. (Most SERS titles are “coordinated” but some are not.)
What is left is to tinker around the edges.
You could offer a consideration model to cash out of Tier 1, but it would have to include “keep what you have” without preconditions … something that has not really been proposed to date. Suspect anyone who gets decent financial planning advice would reject a buyout offer.
The most likely change (not reform, change) left would be to shift the “current” school pension payments from the State to the local school districts. Under normal circumstances, that shift would require the State to send more funding to the school districts or force the school districts to raise their portion of the property tax … in effect, a back door tax not directly enacted by the State.
If you add in the Governor’s proposed permanent property tax freeze, then, lacking additional State funding, the school districts will have to cut back, probably through a combination of consolidations and layoffs.
If you agree with the above, one of two things happen:
(a) the State increases school funding to make up for the cost shift, so Rauner can claim he increased school funding but it is just a shell game where the extra money (and possibly more local money) just goes into the pension fund
or
(b) it’s a “starve the beast” approach to reducing K-12 funding.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:39 am
What pension reform idea does Rauner support?
Just discontinuing pensions as a thing offerred by the state?
Because he didnt support the pensiom reform the courts killed last time and didnt offer any alternatives then. can someone tell me what he wanted Dems to pass? Did Durkin and Radogno file a bill for it?
So sick and tired of the Rauner administration’s policy nihilism resulting in nothing but cruelty and uncertainty for Illinois citizens.
And they get away with this policy nihilism by distracting with sneering partisanship to give newspapers something to write about in the absence of policy action.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:39 am
Wow, how cowardly is it to balk at calling your own pension bill and deny you mad a deal that was widely reported.
If there was some misunderstanding, he has had 5 months to correct the record.
The reason term limits are so popular is the failed leadership of Leader Madigan and President Cullerton.
Both Chicago democrats have been in Springfield since the 1970’s but they have not figured out a way to fund CPS.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:39 am
Wait. A possible break-though occurred. Cullerton and Radogno agreed on something, “it’s all semantics.”
If we could only get Rauner, Madigan and Durkin to agree on that.
Then, we’d be somewhere. /s
Comment by Deft Wing Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:42 am
== That can only be done if we address the structural imbalances that have bankrupted the State and CPS alike … ==
The basic structural imbalance has been lack of revenue to support the programs that were enacted … and it was papered over by underfunding the pension systems.
You can cut all you want, but the solution is revenue.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:44 am
“Both Chicago democrats have been in Springfield since the 1970’s but they have not figured out a way to fund CPS.”
To solve the funding problem CPS should ask the GA to pass a bill that allows CPS to increase the property tax rate in Chicago. With the lowest property tax rate in all of Cook County, Chicago property tax payers can well afford it.
Comment by Hit or Miss Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:46 am
Just guessing here as always, but it sounds to me like Madigan and Cullerton have decided to stop the charade.
Rauner doesn’t want a budget, he only wants reforms. What part of “no” can’t he understand? We have separation of powers for precisely this reason.
I hope the Democratic leaders know what they’re doing, but I think they’ve decided that they can wait longer than the Governor can. When the Governor decides it’s time to pass a balanced budget, I’m certain he’ll find willing partners in Madigan and Cullerton.
Of course, if he continues to insist on “reforms” first, a lot of people are going to get hurt.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:49 am
hisgirlfriday@ 11:39, +1
I would add, “aided and abetted by complicit mouth-breathing editorial boards and incompetent Dem messaging.” It’s a travesty.
Comment by Crispy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:51 am
Key words “three-fifths”
Comment by Lech W Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:52 am
Both Chicago Democrats are property tax lawyers, at least one of whom admits to making in the 7 figures annually REDUCING his clients property tax bills.
See any potential conflict in your solution Hit or Miss?
Comment by Lucky Pierre Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:52 am
Rauner vetoed the bill because vague pension reforms have not be adopted shortly after the House Pensions committee advanced out SB 2437 which includes specific pension reforms for Chicago.
Is anyone paying attention in his office?
Comment by Dance Band on the Titanic Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:53 am
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:59 am
“When the Governor decides it’s time to pass a balanced budget, I’m certain he’ll find willing partners in Madigan and Cullerton.”
I am sure every Governor since 1970 would disagree with that statement.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 11:59 am
==Ragnarok is underway.==
Can we all look forward to Valhalla then?
Comment by m Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:00 pm
“Starve the beast.” I spent a couple of hours yesterday in a very poor south side Chicago neighborhood grade school sitting in a “peace circle” led by four eighth graders, hearing their stories and their dreams. The school was clean, well maintained. The energy in the hallways was great. Teachers and staff that I passed along the way were engaged and friendly - with us in passing and with the students who are their true focus. The game in Springfield is appalling.
Comment by Uptown Progressive Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:01 pm
===I am sure every Governor since 1970 would disagree with that statement.===
Maybe somebody will ask George Ryan, Jim Edgar and Jim Thompson. I’m pretty sure Illinois has passed annual budgets every year since 1818.
That is, until Bruce Rauner became Governor.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:02 pm
“The election is over.” Wouldn’t know that from the way the ILGOP and Rauner talk….
Comment by The_Equalizer Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:03 pm
===I am sure every Governor since 1970 would disagree with that statement.===
And yet budgets up to Rauner were signed, and structured roll calls existed, and governors of both parties “cheered” at the passage of the budgets.
If Rauner, and you, feel the interpretation of balanced is at the least “flawed”, then Rauner, and you, can roll out a balanced budget, with or without the Rauner Tax.
That will show us all!
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:03 pm
Illinois has been passing unbalanced budgets for decades that Speaker Madigan and President Cullerton have voted for year after year.
Now you somehow believe they are advocates for balancing the budget despite all evidence to the contrary.
It is unusual for men in their 60’s and 70’s to keep playing kick the can. Most give it up before they go to high school.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:10 pm
===Illinois has been passing unbalanced budgets for decades that Speaker Madigan and President Cullerton have voted for year after year.
Now you somehow believe they are advocates for balancing the budget despite all evidence to the contrary.===
Then Rauner should teach them a thing or three…
Where o where is Rauner’s budget?
How much for Higher Ed?
How much for backlog bills?
How much for Pensions? A full payment(s)?
How much for the Departments Of Revenue, Aging, Agriculture…
How much?
Show us.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:14 pm
How about the % of income tax that City of Chicago residents pay into the IL State teacher pension be put towards the CPS pensions? We are the ONLY citizens that pay for CPS AND TRS. Rauner won’t allow that because the state fund is bankrupt too.
Comment by tbf Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:14 pm
===Illinois has been passing unbalanced budgets for decades that Speaker Madigan and President Cullerton have voted for year after year.===
They’ve had a lot of company LP. Plenty of GOP votes on those “unbalanced” budgets. Lol. Not all of us are dumb enough to be fooled by your spin.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:19 pm
Is it too early to nominate RNUG for poster of the year?
In tow posts he completely and with absolute accuracy sums up the situation we are in and how we got there.
To some on the right, there is a desire to believe anyone espousing the need for revenue is simply a tax and spend liberal. Not the case. if you cut spending to zero and then used all revenue to pay old bills, it would take the better part of a decade to get us out of the fix we are in.
Revenue is simply a must. And then the ILGA, all members, have to restrain themselves from finding new programs to spend the revenue on.
=If all local taxing bodies are capped - the pressure will really build on the unions that represent Public Works, Teacher, Fire and Police. The corporate authorities…the Villages,School Dists, Libraries and Park Districts now faced with zero revenue growth from property taxes will have to get serious about union negotiations.=
Where have you been living? This has been happening (getting serious) for at least the last 5 years.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:23 pm
–Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno agreed with Durkin’s take.–
Oh, well then, case closed.
Has Sen. Radogno found those “metrics” she was talking about yesterday? The ones that show the positive impact on the budget of term limits and a property tax freeze?
They must exist, because she said so. She wouldn’t say it if it weren’t true, right?
Golly, it sure would be helpful if she found them, to sell these “reforms.”
Has she looked under the couch? The glove compartment?
Can someone in the media check with her on the status of these critical “metrics?”
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:23 pm
The kids in a cold Chicago classroom could use some of the hot air that comes out of Springfield.
Is this the best we can do ? Is it any wonder only about 45% of the people bother to vote.
Comment by Mokenavince Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:25 pm
Culloton has just lost whatever credibility he might still have had. The governor in June clearly stated the $215 million for CPS was tied to an overall pension reform bill. If that had not been the case why would Culloton not come forward in June. The Dems should all just admit they are not interested in anything but tax and more spending- reforms be damned
Comment by Sue Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:27 pm
Clearly BigBrain SuperStar is in need of that mental health service he recently told a federal judge was needed for DOC tenants. Now BigBrain and his imaginary friends believe there was some agreement. He can send out video trackers,but not develop a relationship to schedule meetings it seems like a need for treatment quickly
Comment by Annonin' Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:48 pm
Dear President Cullerton,
You trusted Rauner.
Learn from this mistake.
OW
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:48 pm
I have a request, actually a rather simple one. Now that we’ve reduced the “reforms” down to a permanent property tax freeze and term limits, can we stop using the term? I keep hearing about the need for “structural” and “economic” reforms but it would be much simpler if we now provided the clarity that Rauner finally offered up yesterday on his needed “reforms”.
And if I’m granted a second request I would ask Rauner to now succinctly describe the benefits that term limits and a permanent property tax freeze will offer and why those issues were worth holding up the entire budget process for 2 years.
Comment by Pundent Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:50 pm
–And if I’m granted a second request I would ask Rauner to now succinctly describe the benefits that term limits and a permanent property tax freeze will offer and why those issues were worth holding up the entire budget process for 2 years.–
Don’t expect any help from Illinois media on that one. They’ve had two years to ask those questions, too.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:53 pm
Dear ILGOP,
You failed to actually say “Governor Rauner vetoed”
===After Madigan and Cullerton reneged on their promise to pass pension reform, an agreement that would have freed up resources for Chicago schools, House and Senate Democrats will face their first big test.
Will they choose to recklessly bail out Chicago Public Schools, or will they stand with taxpayers who demand Springfield and the City of Chicago exercise fiscal sanity===
Spin it all you want, Governor Rauner’s veto will layoff teachers.
Only a governor can veto.
Why do Madigan and Cullerton need to choose?
Governor Rauner vetoed.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:55 pm
Shorter ILGOP message:
We’ve kidnapped the Chicago Public Schools. Meet all of our demands and further instructions will follow.
Attached is a photo of a blind-folded Forrest Claypool holding today’s Chicago Tribune.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:56 pm
==Now that we’ve reduced the “reforms” down to a permanent property tax freeze and term limits, can we stop using the term?==
Probably not, because Rauner will continue to bargain against himself. He’s abandoned all but 2 items on the ol’ Turnaround Agenda, and I bet he’s got one more in him.
I think he holds out for term limits. Is entire term is defined by some weird need to prove himself stronger than Madigan and the unions, and he still has the AFSCME negotiations to push the unions around.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:57 pm
===“He’s (Gov. Rauner) trying to starve CPS, that’s his goal.”===
Once all of “Chicago” feels the Rauner 2012 plan, that veto might not sound like such a good idea.
Governors own. Governors own vetoes.
The CTU polls pretty good in Chicago, Rauner numbers?
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:59 pm
–Wow, how cowardly is it to balk at calling your own pension bill and deny you mad a deal that was widely reported.
If there was some misunderstanding, he has had 5 months to correct the record.–
Please provide the citation where Cullerton said there was a deal.
Flackery from the governor’s office, “widely reported” by you, do not count as credible sources.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 12:59 pm
Didn’t CPS’s new contract end the pension pick up for new hires?
Comment by Carhartt Representative Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:00 pm
This is where I have a problem. “attendance issues in both chambers” its a really nice paying part time job !!!!!!!!!!
Comment by Just Because Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:03 pm
Rauner has been pushing legislation to allow and promoting CPS bankruptcy for more than a year.
This veto is just him exerting leverage in an attempt to achieve those goals.
Any fiscal question with this guy and the answer is shorting contracts or “bankruptcy.” Just like he and Trump operated in the private sector.
Real conservative GOP values.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:11 pm
Good on Rahm.
Note: Bruce Rauner clouted his denied, Winnetka-living daughter into Payton Prep, over a worthy child, and now Governor Rauner is angling for Teacher Layoffs and possibly angling for legislation for CPS Bankruptcy, yet again.
Rauner this time will deny more than one Chicago student with this Veto.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:15 pm
I assume Rauner has done the math to know that Chicago is a lost cause for his re-election. He’ll count on the totals of the 101 other counties to beat Cook.
I assume this veto is all about that calculus — that he’s got the rest of the state in the bag.
Comment by Bobby Catalpa Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:15 pm
=The governor in June clearly stated the $215 million for CPS was tied to an overall pension reform bill.=
Well then, there it is. If the governor says so it must be a fact./s
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:17 pm
===I assume Rauner has done the math to know that Chicago is a lost cause for his re-election. He’ll count on the totals of the 101 other counties to beat Cook.===
Ugh.
1) Rauner will be up in 2 years. That’s a lifetime.
2) Ideology drives the politics. The “math” as you say is second here to ideology. A win with Raunerism still gives two years.
3) Chicago must be at or “close” to 20% for any statewide “Republican”. Rauner is a Raunerite, so all bets are off, but 20% continues to be the benchmark percentage (with a plurality that measures within turnout)
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:20 pm
Wordslinger, stop it with the misdirection, Rich said it was widely reported and there is a link at the top of the page to the Sun Times article about the pension deal made in June.
You are sounding like Bagdad Bob
Comment by Lucky Pierre Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:20 pm
McCann voted to override. And people wondered why the Governor and his people were so hellbent on getting rid of him. He was the deciding vote.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:24 pm
To the updates:
I guess that spiritual and romantic trip to Rome didn’t make Rauner, Emanuel and Cullerton all dreamy for each other after all.
Wasn’t that the plan? A “reset?” Didn’t Madigan get knocked for skipping on that new chance for love?
What went wrong? Didn’t they throw coins in the Trevi fountain and make wishes? Ride triple on a Vespa together around the Coliseum? Hold hands and skip up the Spanish Steps?
If those crazy kids couldn’t find love in Rome, what chance at romance do they have in Springfield?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:26 pm
How do the Democrats not get their whole Caucus into town for this stuff? Reaves-Harris, Harper, Thapedi & DeLuca missed the AVR override - have any of them showed up?
The Sonya Harper Nonvote is galling considering that she replaced Esther Golar, who left her deathbed to show up & vote
Comment by Grand Avenue Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:32 pm
I believe Reaves-Harris is in the hospital.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:34 pm
LP, so Cullerton is lying?
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:36 pm
M- you tell me einherjar.
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:36 pm
McAuliffe was a yes vote in June and half his district is in Chicago, so this is in the interest of his district - lets see what a couple million can buy the Governor
Comment by Grand Avenue Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:38 pm
==I assume Rauner has done the math to know that Chicago is a lost cause for his re-election.==
Rauner absolutely won’t win Chicago in ‘18, but he can limit the damage, both in the margin and in Chicago’s turnout. He did just that in ‘14!
Plus, y’know, he’s Governor of Chicago, too.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:41 pm
If and when McAuliffe votes no on this, how does he explain it to his district? The 2018 ads against him would write themselves - he voted no to Millions of dollars for schools in his district.
Unless of course DPI designs the mail and walkpieces again in which case he’ll win in another blowout.
Comment by Grand Avenue Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:41 pm
Also, they shouldn’t let Rob Martwick pick the candidate again. He’ll probably catch a Republican opponent of his own though
Comment by Grand Avenue Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:43 pm
- Grand Avenue -
McAuliffe will be fine.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:43 pm
If DPI designs his opponent’s mail again, McAuliffe will be golden
Comment by Grand Avenue Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:44 pm
===”This is where I have a problem. “attendance issues in both chambers”” ====
Exactly!! I do not understand attendance problems. Especially interesting when working on school funding.
Comment by newbie here Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:47 pm
–Rich said it was widely reported and there is a link at the top of the page to the Sun Times article about the pension deal made in June.–
How many named sources do you see in that Sun-Times article saying there’s a deal?
None. No Rauner. No Cullerton. No Emanuel. No Madigan. No-Bah-Dee.
If they were all in agreement, how come no one was willing to put their name to it?
Hardly the first time that “sources” in the Rauner administration have claimed there was a deal when there wasn’t. Oompa-loompa games.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:51 pm
The governor clearly stated in his veto message:
“The agreement was clear: Republicans supported Senate Bill 2822 only on the condition that Democrats reengage in serious, good faith negotiations;”
It would appear from the governor’s own people that this has been happening as part of the leaders’ meetings in recent days.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:52 pm
I don’t think Mayor Emanuel understands that telling his old buddy Governor Rauner that its the CPS children who will pay the price for his veto is not news to the Governor. Governor Rauner and Sec of Education designate DeVos believe that a district like CPS has to be gutted and rebuilt on a market structure utilizing largely a combination of vouchers and charter schools.
Mayor Emanuel flirts with charter schools and market mechanisms, but fundamentally he believes in public schools run by school boards, preferably under his control in the case of Chicago. Governor Rauner is a true believer in markets and the dream of competition. I also suspect the Governor knows well what Militon Friedman meant when he wrote: “Only a crisis - actual or perceived - produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes the politically inevitable.”
Comment by Rod Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:58 pm
It looks to me that Rauner might be looking for the CPS to layoff more CTU members with his veto of the bailout. This is in line with his anti union stance on many issues.
Comment by Illinois Native Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 1:58 pm
Can we not just get through one thing at a time? I’m pretty sure they all want to come up with legislation to attempt (once gain) to “reform” the pension system. That does not need to be linked to this bill. This is what happens when you have no trust.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:04 pm
Word - just to be clear President Cullerton said on the floor of the Senate that in exchange for the Chicago Teachers Pension Fund cash that he would engage in pension reform negotiations.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-cps-illinois-pension-money-rauner-madigan-cullerton-emanuel-20160708-story.html
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:04 pm
–President Cullerton said on the floor of the Senate that in exchange for the Chicago Teachers Pension Fund cash that he would engage in pension reform negotiations.–
“Deal” and “negotiations” are not synonyms in the English language.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:11 pm
Word - so then where is Cullerton’s bill or even a bullet point proposal? To my knowledge nothing has come down the pike.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:14 pm
TS, see Update 3.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:16 pm
Rauner coulda walked into this(?)
House “can’t” override, bill dies, the Dems tried to save CPS, Rauner’s veto…
Dunno if the politics works here with that veto…
… or it works so perfect that pain again wins out.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:16 pm
OW, shhh the game is on. I believe Wordslinger has the ball.
Comment by Casual observer Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:22 pm
I’m baffled by President Cullerton, someone who I have generally highly respected. There WAS a deal. You get the $200 million EXTRA if and ONLY IF CPS enacts meaningful pension reform. For Cullerton or Rahm to act outraged is disingenuous, at best. There was a deal; CPS did not live up to its end of the bargain; there is not deal.
Comment by phocion Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:23 pm
Sounds simple enough. Respond to Rauner by sending in a pension reform bill. Then, CPS gets the money. Just LOL @ CTU wanting to throw more money and no changes at the problem.
Comment by BK Bro Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:27 pm
Since IllinoisGo failed miserably, it’s apparent that this veto is not about inflicting pain on Chicago so Chicago members get primaried.
What Rauner wants is for non-Chicago Dems who didn’t vote for this the first time to be tempted to vote this time so they can be pilloried for supporting the Chicago Schools bailout.
Let’s see if any of them fall for it.
Comment by Grand Avenue Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:27 pm
47th - okay. Fine. Why hasn’t he released portions to the press? Or even said a peep about specifics? If he blasts some info out today then I’ll walk back my criticism and eat crow. Until then I question why he didn’t get in front of the game and take his case to the press. Cullerton is usually more savvy than that.
And for the record I’m not saying he should dump the bill on people’s desks now. I’m saying he should at least issue a release or provide a memo with basic ideas/points. That’s it.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:28 pm
= There WAS a deal.=
And your proof is? I am not saying that Cullerton could not be full of bologna on this, but history tells us the Rauner is more often than not the purveyor of the do-do in these situations.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:29 pm
Don’t get me wrong I hate many of the things Rauner is doing…
But I love this.
Comment by John Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:31 pm
–I’m baffled by President Cullerton, someone who I have generally highly respected. There WAS a deal. You get the $200 million EXTRA if and ONLY IF CPS enacts meaningful pension reform.–
Now you’re just making stuff up that doesn’t make any sense. The alleged “deal” or “negotiations” involved the state pension funds.
How could Cullerton be a party to a “deal” for the Chicago School Board to “reform” its pensions?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:31 pm
JS Mill - from the last two paragraphs of the Tribune article I linked above:
“As for the CPS pension help measure itself, there’s currently a hold on the bill in the Senate, per the budget agreement. Lawmakers aren’t supposed to send it to the governor until there’s a deal on pension reform. Failing that, Rauner gets to veto the bill. A Democratic override is unlikely due to the timing. Rauner gets 60 days to act on the bill after lawmakers send it to him, and the current General Assembly will gavel to close before Jan. 11. If Rauner vetoed the bill after that point, no override vote could be held — it’s a different crop of lawmakers.
“Dealt a tough hand is Democratic Senate President John Cullerton, who wants both the CPS pension help and state pension reform. The two parties are negotiating off Cullerton’s 2015 pension plan, which amounts to giving government workers a choice between keeping more generous yearly cost-of-living increases or continuing to count pay raises in calculating their retirement benefits. The idea is to try to thread the needle on Illinois Supreme Court rulings that found the state constitution’s pension protection clause to be ironclad.”
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:34 pm
- Casual observer -
You chastising is duly noted. Since others are moving on, if it’s all the same with you, I may do the same. I mean, if it’s ok?
I guess what’s the sticking point is this deal thingy and releasing the “carrot” bill to the governor without a deal, understanding, or negotiated agreement where things actually were and are.
If communications were not lacking before, the blaming communications now going on seem to be pointed enough.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:35 pm
JS Mill,
Don’t be willfully ignorant. In fact, why don’t you just read the first part of this section, that references the deal. Better yet, here’s the link so you don’t have to trouble yourself by scrolling up: http://chicago.suntimes.com/news/what-the-budget-fix-really-means-for-chicagos-schools/
The deal was cut, and everyone was aware of it. This was never free money for CPS; there were strings attached. So, yes, Cullerton is lying - and it pains me to say so.
Comment by phocion Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:38 pm
My memory is a bit fuzzy, but I think Cullerton is mostly correct. The deal, such as it was, was to attempt to reform CPS pensions. Now it seems Rauner is claiming the deal was reforming all staye and local government pensions.
If that is the case, then Rauner moved the goalposts.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:39 pm
http://chicago.suntimes.com/news/clock-ticking-for-rauner-to-sign-215m-cps-teacher-pension-bill/
“When the governor signed off on the deal giving Chicago $215 million for teacher pensions, it was with the unwritten understanding that CPS would get the money — but only if there was an elusive deal to save state pensions. And that’s unlikely to happen until Illinois has a permanent budget.”
http://www.chicagonow.com/public-affairs-with-jeff-berkowitz/2016/06/state-budget-deal-in-springfield-almost-done-cps-and-state-government-roll-on-rauner-gets-one-reform-maybe/
“CPS will also get, in this bill, $200 million in annual “pension parity” funding, starting in June, 2017, so long as the General Assembly passes by January, 2017 state employee pension reform, comparable to the legislation proposed by Senate President Cullerton.”
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-cps-illinois-pension-money-rauner-madigan-cullerton-emanuel-20160708-story.html
“The budget-saving CPS help is supposed to be doled out only if Democratic leaders and Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner can agree on state pension reform by early January.”
Took me less than 120 seconds via Google. I’d say the two biggest newspapers in the state, along with this blog right here, qualifies as “widely reported.”
If my deal was widely reported wrong, I think I would have corrected the record a long time ago.
Comment by m Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:40 pm
OW, my sincere apologies. I was just enjoying, and frankly learning from the back and forth. I don’t read all post but always read yours.
With respect…
Comment by Casual observer Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:40 pm
Rich can correct me if I’m wrong. My understanding of the deal was that passage of a pension benefit bill was a condition for signing the bill. If that wasn’t the deal, then bad on Cullerton and Madigan for not raising the issue when it was misreported or misrepresented.
If the issue is that Rauner pulled the trigger on the veto early, then bad on him.
I always expected the pension bill to be voted on during Jan lame duck days.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:46 pm
-Norse
My guess is that when madigan effectively killed any real lame duck action with the no lame duck tax stunt, Rauner pulled the veto trigger.
Comment by m Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:48 pm
TS, do you notice anything funny about that Trib “story” you linked?
It purports to lay out, step by step, what the “deal” is, yet there’s not a single attribution. Not one — from the governor’s office, the GA, the mayor’s office, anybody.
Not only that, but it has no byline.
So you don’t know where the information is coming from, and you don’t know who put it together.
But we’re supposed to believe that’s the “deal?” Says who — literally?
I don’t know what that’s supposed to be, but it’s not credible, sourced journalism by any stretch of the imagination.
For all we know, Rauner gave it to his old business partner Ferro and he ran it verbatim.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:49 pm
- Casual observer -
No harm, all good, no worries on my end. Gave ya the needle, nothing more. Thanks for your kind words.
===My guess is that when madigan effectively killed any real lame duck action with the no lame duck tax stunt, Rauner pulled the veto trigger.===
Wasn’t McSweeney and not Madigan the sponsor.
It also got 80+ votes and Rauner’s blessing.
So, what’s your point on this?
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:51 pm
The deal was mentioned on the House Floor explicitly during debate when the bill passed in May or June (bipartisan support). The record is clear… clearer it would appear than Cullerton’s timid personality or perhaps its his memory.
Comment by Deft Wing Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:57 pm
Word - unless I’m wrong (and Rich can correct me if I am) I believe it’s Monique Garcia who provides most or all of the Clout Street info. She’s about as impartial and fair of a reporter as it gets. She also spends a lot of time in the Senate galleries so it’s not like she’s writing from a second- or third-hand perspective.
Cullerton iterated on the floor that he would tie the CTPF appropriation to a pension deal. Period. That was the understanding at the time of the vote. And if you look at the Republicans who voted for it - specifically Leader Radongo, then-Deputy Leader Murphy, Assistant Leader Syverson and SGOP Budgeteer Rose - those four would’ve never voted for a straight up cash payment to the CTPF. The vote was incumbent upon pension negotiations and an eventual deal.
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/99/senate/09900SB2822_06302016_002000C.pdf
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:57 pm
There was a three pronged mechanism for CPS to plug their budget hole that was expected to be roughly 1/3 each:
1) Increase in Property Tax Levy in Chicago - Done
2) State kicking in the $2215 million - Vetoed, TBD
3) Savings from the agreement with the Teachers Union - The City caved and didn’t get the $$ they needed here.
So 2 of the 3 fixes for the CURRENT fiscal year went under. Where was the outrage when the new teachers contract didn’t come up with the savings needed?
No to mention all this is only for this year, next year, another giant hole to fill.
Comment by Former Bartender Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 2:58 pm
–The deal was mentioned on the House Floor explicitly during debate when the bill passed in May or June (bipartisan support). The record is clear…–
Then you should have no problem laying it out from public sources, since it was “mentioned” so “explicitly” and is so “clear.”
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:00 pm
- m, good guess. But a fit of pique doesn’t absolve Rauner of the lame for killing the deal early - if that was the deal. Pension bills are always difficult to pass and moving it in January makes sense.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:09 pm
“Blame” not “lame.”
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:10 pm
Word, JS Mill, et al - here’s a story from Tina Sfondeles. You know - a real person and a real reporter who put her name on the article which she wrote and published. If you scroll a little past halfway down you’ll see the House vote on the CTPF appropriation and the notation about how the CTPF bill won’t be sent to the Governor’s desk until pension reform passes.
http://chicago.suntimes.com/news/budget-bills-pass-illinois-house-amid-last-minute-drama/
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:12 pm
TS, small point of order. The bill had to be sent because of time requirements. The issue is whether it would be signed. Again, I was expecting January vote.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:17 pm
-ow
Was simply explaining an idea as to what happened.
Once it was going (Franks or McSweeney, didn’t matter), no need to put the brick on. Madigan declared lame duck dead, so he let it be. Might as well let McSweeney get some credit for stopping a tax hike. There’s certainly a question as to where McSweeney was going in the first place was he rogue? Or was it about what Franks was going to do anyway.
If you know the Franks deal was going to get a vote, then you know lame duck is dead. Why not let an R run his own (a better version, because non binding, so everyone still leaves it open down the road), that way you make sure everyone knows it’s R’s standing up to #taxhikemike. Madigan goes along because he was going to run the Franks one anyway, but this way he doesn’t have to worry about Cullerton taking it up and passing it as well.(because Madigan doesn’t actually want to kill lameduck forever)
Comment by m Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:17 pm
From the Sun Times story referenced by -Team Sleep-:
“The governor did step up and make, what I consider an honest compromise working through the issues,” the mayor said.
What compromise was the mayor referring to?
Comment by CapnCrunch Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:31 pm
“If it doesn’t appear in writing, then it doesn’t exist.” That is what I was taught about contracts and agreements. Just because a Governor or a newspaper reporter says it is so, doesn’t make it so. This Governor has said plenty that didn’t pan out to be true. Election night: “I just got off the phone speaking with Speaker Madigan (and President Cullerton)……”
I couldn’t find any pension “reform” language in the text of SB 2822 or its amendments. Can you?
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=2822&GAID=13&DocTypeID=SB&LegId=96133&SessionID=88&GA=99
Comment by Joe M Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:31 pm
Karen Lewis continues to distinguish herself. /s
When the book closes on her lack of substantive service, I don’t know that there will be a single accomplishment to point to.
Comment by A guy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:41 pm
Guy, you don’t know plenty.
But your informed and unbiased judgment of Lewis’ life is duly noted. See you in church.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:47 pm
@TS- Thanks for the link, I also read it at the time. I don’t know anything about the reporter but I do note that there are no quotes from either side to back up her statement, no named sources.
I am not accusing her of making it up. It is likely someone told her that, but their name never appears.
There might have been a deal. That is possible. But I do not think this is article is actually proof. Someone said there was a deal. Unless she reveals her sources we won’t know who it was.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:53 pm
Sling, Church would be the last place I would expect to run into you. She’s a boor. I’m not unbiased. I’ve observed her for years accomplish nothing. She’s no Jacquie Vaughan.
While we’re at it. Are you finally acknowledging that Tina did write about “the deal”. It had multiple airings at the time and was highlighted as the impetus for the stop gap at the end of session. Yet you are now trying to split hairs on a micro level and you’re still not correct?
I guess we all bring our biases with us. History will show Karen Lewis having done far more damage to CTU than any other single people. There are two kinds of people in her book. People she hates and people she hates more. Name one productive thing she’s done. Take your time.
Comment by A guy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:57 pm
=Karen Lewis continues to distinguish herself. /s=
I’ve never been a big fan of Lewis’. But I have to say that she’s a more effective communicator on this topic right now than anything I’m hearing from the Democrats.
And what exactly about her message is inaccurate? Or do you believe that term limits and a permanent property tax freeze are more important than funding education?
Comment by Pundent Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 3:59 pm
=Don’t be willfully ignorant.=
Maybe you need to read your own stuff. Words mean something.
See my last post.
I would bet that someone told her there was a deal. Has a source ever been wrong?
Willfully ignorant is accepting a story that has no noted sources and not even considering whether it is accurate or not.
To see willfully ignorant all you have to do is look in a mirror.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 4:00 pm
===Sling, Church would be the last place I would expect to run into you.===
That’s bad form.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 4:01 pm
===(because Madigan doesn’t actually want to kill lameduck forever)===
That’s True. I think
Then your premise on this holds no water, so Rauner decided to blow up CPS like he is because the Rauner Tax had little or no chance once the McSweeney Resolution passed… with 80+ votes.
If I buy your premise, that I have to buy Rauner wants no budget, and “BossMadigan.Com” is the new normal because Rauner now will continue to blow things up, try to blame Madigan for Governor vetoes, and pain like closing state universities is fine for Rauner.
If Rauner vetoes CPS here as retaliation of Republican McSweeney following his well-known ideology that Rauner himself agrees (no tax votes in Veto session), what are you saying about Rauner’s judgement?
Rauner is reckless?
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 4:09 pm
—-”The budget-saving CPS help is supposed to be doled out only if Democratic leaders and Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner can agree on state pension reform by early January.—
And today is December 1, not early January.
So if that was “the deal,” who blew it up today with a veto?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 4:18 pm
@Wordslinger- And today is December 1, not early January.
An excellent point.
I believe- although other may argue to the contrary for some reason- the governor vetoed the bill.
Well played sir.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 4:22 pm
==So if that was “the deal,” who blew it up today with a veto?==
If there was no deal, why did Cullerton sit on it until November 7. If the bill was agreed and to be signed only on the merits of the bill, why not send it to him and force his hand in July?
Comment by Jaded Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 4:34 pm
Jaded - there is a cynical reason and a logical reason for Cullerton not sending it to Rauner back right after overtime session. The cynical reason is that a Rauner veto in the summer would mean bringing legislators back for a veto override bill before the election. The logical reason is that most would prefer that President Cullerton not just hastily throw out a proposal or bill that is sloppily done and would never meet constitutional muster.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 4:44 pm
===a Rauner veto in the summer would mean bringing legislators back for a veto override bill before the election===
Um, no.
That’s why we have a veto session.
The clock only starts running during a scheduled session day.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 4:46 pm
TS,
I get why he would hold the bill if there was a deal. Cullerton said there was no deal, so if that was the case, why hold the bill? Also, why November 7. That puts a drop date of January 5. Lame duck sessions are usually the two, three or four (or more) days prior to the new GA. This bill would have dropped a week before inauguration day. Again, a curious time to send the bill to the Governor…
Comment by Jaded Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 4:50 pm
Rich - sorry about that. I forgot about the provision at the end of Article IV, Section 9, Subsection (b). I should have rethought this before I typed and hit send. I was more so thinking or wondering why it took Cullerton so long to send Rauner the bill. I was under the impression that CPS/CTPF needed the money before the start of the school. After all they were screaming bloody murder back in May and June about needing the cash then. That is why I could never figure out why this was not handled during veto session instead of back in June. And yes - perhaps I have overthought this. I have long ago given up trying to figure out what is going on around here.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 5:03 pm
“There was a three pronged mechanism for CPS to plug their budget hole that was expected to be roughly 1/3 each::
You should add layoffs as a fourth option for CPS to consider.
Comment by Small town taxpayer Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 5:19 pm
=== I was more so thinking or wondering why it took Cullerton so long to send Rauner the bill===
Because the clock is ticking and he wanted Rauner to act before the 99th GA adjourns sine die. Also, the pension talks were supposed to start after the election.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 5:21 pm
–Also, the pension talks were supposed to start after the election.–
If that’s the case, then there could not have been a “deal” on specific pension legislation last spring, as some have said.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 5:29 pm
===then there could not have been a “deal” on specific pension legislation last spring===
The deal was to try and make a deal before the 99th ends.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 5:32 pm
==- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 4:01 pm:
===Sling, Church would be the last place I would expect to run into you.===
That’s bad form.==
Oy vey Willy. If there’s one dude here who doesn’t need a “Safe Space” it’s Sling.
Comment by A guy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 5:32 pm
–The deal was to try and make a deal before the 99th ends.–
I guess today’s veto ends any chance of that.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 5:44 pm
===Oy vey Willy. If there’s one dude here who doesn’t need a “Safe Space” it’s Sling.===
While I do think it’s bad form against - Wordslinger -…
… ===That’s bad form.===…
… is actually about the community here.
- Wordslinger - can defend himself, it was never about him. It is about courtesy.
To the Post,
I guess the next question IS… can/could there be 71 out there?
If Rauner still has Dunkin, then the Veto itself was sealed knowing 71 would never occur(?)
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 5:48 pm
Late to the party here, but I distinctly recall that the $215m for CPS/CTPF was totally contingent on passage of “pension reform” for the State systems by early January. My recollection is clear in part because I thought several times that the month of December was not going to be too merry for a lot of folks in town if a pension cut bill had to be hammered out.
I agree with RNUG that the well of Constitutional ideas is just about dry. I would tinker with the funding program a bit and nuke the SURS-only “money purchase” benefit formula. I have another idea that would get me run outta town on a rail, but could save some money. I’m not gonna roll it out until someone smarter than me tells me it’s constitutional.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 5:50 pm
==I guess today’s veto ends any chance of that.==
No, as you know, this bill can be re-produced and passed in a matter of hours, in January, if there is a larger pension deal. The bill is just a piece of paper. There is a lot of paper in Springfield.
Comment by Jaded Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 5:52 pm
Word - maybe not if we actually have a productive veto session. I truly wonder how much will be done during veto session given the current climate and the Franks-McSweeney anti-lame duck rhetoric that seems to be gaining steam. And does Madigan really even want to go along with the original deal?! Again - nothing surprises me anymore.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 6:05 pm
No override for CPS…
This is going to be one interesting month.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 6:15 pm
-ow
=Rauner is reckless?=
It’s a blame game at this point. If you knew there’s no deal because Madigan was going to run the Franks bill and kill lameduck, then the veto didn’t really blow anything up, nor did it blow it up by letting McSweeney’s resolution take the place of Franks (and not put a brick on it), because lameduck was already dead thanks to the Speaker. Rauner could make a case that lameduck was dead, so cut your political losses and let R’s take credit for stopping #taxhikemike (or something like that).
But the whole thing is bad form and bad faith on all sides no matter what your perspective is.
Comment by m Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 6:22 pm
== This is going to be one interesting month. ==
If nothing else, going to be interesting to see the exact language on whatever pension bill Cullerton runs.
I’m betting on a coerced choice version with no keep what you have. The savings will be claimed for this year’s budget while it’s being challenged in court. In other words, this year’s version of kick the can.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 6:27 pm
Were I mjm and cullerton I would give him the pension deal. They probably know it will go down in flames in the ISC. they get what they want for CPS(which I disagree with BTW) and the pensions stuff is all for show. A short term win for Rainer that is really a sham.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 6:31 pm
===It’s a blame game at this point.===
Bruce Rauner vetoed. Not Madigan, not Cullerton…
Even Yaffe’s utter ignorance refuses to type the word.. “veto”
And yet…
It seems the Press, Rahm, Cullerton, Lewis…
All those “hurt”, real and “real”… were hurt by Rauner’s Veto, a Governor’s Veto.
===Madigan was going to run the Franks bill and kill lameduck, then the veto didn’t really blow anything up, nor did it blow it up by letting McSweeney’s resolution take the place of Franks (and not put a brick on it), because lameduck was already dead thanks to the Speaker. Rauner could make a case that lameduck was dead, so cut your political losses and let R’s take credit for stopping #taxhikemike (or something like that).===
This is the sideshow…
The Veto is something only a governor can do.
- m -
If I’m CTU, or a parent organization, or a Chicago legislator, here’s Rauner’s reality.
“When he thought no one was looking, Bruce Rauner clouted his daughter, already denied by Payton Prep, and living in Winnetka, hurting one other Chicago student’s opportunity. Bruce Rauner did it because he thought Payton Prep was the best, and made sure his child got the best.
Gov. Rauner today hurts thousands of students by using something only a governor can do, use a veto. Teachers may be laid off, the educations of thousands of Chicago students are now in peril, because Gov. Rauner recklessly decided a veto was needed.
When children not named Rauner find their teachers are laid off, their schools are worse off, they’re chances are less, the act of a governor, Bruce Rauner, made it so”.
So…
You can try to “blame” Cullerton, you can “try” to show that Rauner didn’t approve of 80+ votes were on the board for no Lame Duck Tax Increases…
… but… Rauner’s veto… has hurt Chicago students, and not just one who didn’t go to Payton Prep.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 6:46 pm
===I’m betting on a coerced choice version with no keep what you have. The savings will be claimed for this year’s budget while it’s being challenged in court. In other words, this year’s version of kick the can.===
That’s just about it, bud. The faux relief, to relieve the pressure of “not doing anything”, and accomplishing nothing.
Same. Same as it ever was.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 6:54 pm
House left town without voting according to ABC nees
Comment by Sue Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 7:02 pm
This whole fiasco also shows how impractical it is to use the budget process to leverage other legislation. You can only really do deals inside each bill, on the subject of the bill, at the time of passage. The constitution is written this way because it assumes imperfect people in power.
I thought they had promised to try to reach a deal on CPS pensions, but either way, the whole strategy is just plain annoying.
Comment by peon Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 7:07 pm
quit holding the people and the budget hostage gov,,in no way shape or from is this m,j,m fault!!!
Comment by fed up Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 7:08 pm
Have you ever seen legislation vetoed because of a media availability?
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 7:35 pm
RE: Karen Lewis response - Ms. Lewis, please listen to yourself for 30 seconds. Did you really, honestly, expect the Governor to just GIVE you money? Just give it to you?
Comment by Just Me Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 8:14 pm
Here is what I don’t understand, if the Speaker says we should pass a budget the way we usually pass a budget, then why doesn’t he work with his staff and write a budget, and then plop it on everyone’s desk and vote on it an hour later, and then adjourn sine die?
Comment by Just Me Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 8:15 pm
== Here is what I don’t understand, if the Speaker says we should pass a budget the way we usually pass a budget, then why doesn’t he work with his staff and write a budget, and then plop it on everyone’s desk and vote on it an hour later, and then adjourn sine die? ==
Because if MJM does that, then the D’s get blamed for the cuts or tax increases. MJM isn’t going to do that with a R Governor who will vilify him and the party for doing so … and may well either completely or line item veto it anyway.
MJM was willing to run his budget with both Blago and Quinn when they became disfunctional because he was saving the party, not the Gov per se.
That’s the whole ball game. It comes down to trust (or respect) between enemies … and there is no trust.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 8:26 pm
===MJM was willing to run his budget with both Blago and Quinn when they became disfunctional because he was saving the party, not the Gov per se.===
This. It can not be overstated why for Madigan and Demicrats it was critical to keep government functioning thru all that dysfunction. It was the absolute fear Blago and Quinn would drag the HDems, and all Dems down.
Rauner is a Raunerite. Governors owning like this veto is what Madigan needs, and what Rauner tries to avoid.
===That’s the whole ball game. It comes down to trust (or respect) between enemies … and there is no trust.===
… and you point out so well… no respect. Rauner wants “BossMadigan.Com” rolling AND capitulation, not a mutual respect to governing. So why would Madigan feel the need to oblige?
- RNUG -, you’ve been great today, per usual actually. Good stuff.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 8:44 pm
RNUG - I was being facetious. What I was trying to point out is that Madigan isn’t being truthful when he says we should pass a budget like we always do, and nobody is calling him out on his lie.
Comment by Just Me Thursday, Dec 1, 16 @ 9:46 pm
WHERE IS THE MONEY FOR SANCTUARY CITIES COMING FROM PUT THAT MONEY TOWARDS LEGAL AMERICANS AND WHY IS IT THAT NO ONE EVER SPEAKS OF THIS?
Comment by HANK Friday, Dec 2, 16 @ 6:16 am
==Ragnarok is underway.==
==Can we all look forward to Valhalla then?==
Depends. Does Valhalla fully fund their K-12?
Comment by Flaming Liberal Friday, Dec 2, 16 @ 9:01 am