Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** LIVE *** Senate session coverage
Next Post: Pritzker contributions questioned
Posted in:
The top Democrat in the Illinois Senate abruptly canceled key votes Wednesday on a plan to end the state’s historic budget stalemate, accusing Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner of sabotaging a compromise that had been months in the making.
Senate President John Cullerton of Chicago ditched his earlier vow to call votes on key parts of the so-called “grand bargain,” including an income-tax increase and property tax-freeze.
After the Senate clocked out, Cullerton questioned the first-term governor’s sincerity in meeting legislative Democrats halfway to end the nation’s longest budget stalemate in nearly a century.
“He’s got to grow up,” Cullerton said about Rauner. […]
“The governor injected himself into the process and doesn’t want this approved in this form,” Cullerton said before the Senate adjourned for the day without taking action on the plan. “Situation is not getting any better. We need to work together to solve this. I had hoped it would be today.”
Republicans dismissed the allegations as scapegoating for a plan that’s not ready for prime time. The public drama unfolded after a long day of behind-the-scenes negotiations, as Senate leaders had hoped for a vote on some of the more controversial portions of the multipart plan. That effort has struggled to get off the ground amid broad opposition from unions, the business community and conservative groups alike. […]
While Cullerton declined to detail how he believed Rauner derailed talks, his No. 2 accused the governor of threatening Republicans who planned to vote in favor of the legislation. Republicans already were the target of attacks from conservative groups aligned with Rauner.
“We’ve been told that (Rauner) has called them into his office one by one and threatened them if they voted on this grand bargain,” said Sen. Don Harmon, D-Oak Park. “This is really difficult here because my Republican colleagues who have been working in good faith have been undermined by a governor who does not want this deal to cross the finish line.”
A Rauner aide called the allegations “outrageous,” and said the governor and his staff frequently meet with lawmakers on a variety of issues.
* Brian Mackey…
HARMON: “I would ask the Republican members on the other end of that conversation how they felt, because whether the governor thinks he and his team threatened them or not, the reports that we’ve gotten from our Republican colleagues are that they were threatened.”
I tried to ask about this with Republican Sen. Chris Nybo, from Elmhurst. He’d voted for a couple of the grand bargain bills passed the day before. That made him just the sort of Republican that Democrats say the governor was targeting.
But as I stood in the doorway to his Capitol office, Nybo said he did not want to talk about the grand bargain.
MACKEY: “Answer uh — I mean Democrats are saying Republicans were called in and threatened by the governor today — is that …”
NYBO (off mic): “No comment.”
MACKEY: “OK, thank you.”
Whatever happened in those private conversations, something changed.
* AP…
Top Senate Republicans dismissed the idea that Rauner called them off “aye” votes. Deputy Republican Leader Bill Brady of Bloomington reiterated one of Rauner’s main complaints in recent days that the GOP won’t accept a permanent income-tax increase if Democrats insist on limiting their cherished local property tax freeze to two years.
“More work is needed to achieve a good deal for taxpayers,” Rauner spokeswoman Catherine Kelly said. “We encourage senators to keep working.” […]
In remarks on the floor, Radogno didn’t dispute Cullerton’s assertion about Rauner’s involvement but urged continued work.
“I have no question in my mind that we’re going to bring this thing in for a landing,” Radogno said. “There’s enough good will in this building. I know the governor will be joining us in trying to get that done.”
* Korecki…
DEMOCRATS — A breathless, angered state Sen. Heather Steans, a Democrat, urged Republicans to stand up to Rauner so the state could finally have a budget. (Remind you of anything?) “I think what’s happened is that the governor has been clearly interjecting himself in these negotiations and really today I believe we have real evidence that he undermined and killed this today,” Steans said at a news conference. “The governor keeps killing it every time we’re close.”
State Sen. Andy Manar: “I drove to Springfield with the absolute belief that there was a bipartisan agreement on school funding. The only thing that changed from the time I left … is the element of Bruce Rauner being injected into the conversation.”
REPUBLICANS — State Sen. Bill Brady: “The governor is the chief elected official in the state of Illinois. At the end of the day, he needs to be involved … there’s no question in our minds that the governor’s input is valuable.”
State Sen. Karen McConnaughay — “I talked to the governor, this morning, extensively,” she said. “I thought he was very engaged and very supportive. No threats at all.”
State Sen. Jason Barickman: “I was not threatened with anything or provided with any ultimatums or like that. I’ve had lots of discussions with the governor and his staff over the last two years, including over the last few weeks.” In a subsequent interview, Barickman said he believed a deal was still within reach.
* Finke…
“The governor has got to realize that this is as good as it’s going to get,” Cullerton said. “He’s got to grow up and get this solved. He’s the governor.” […]
Cullerton did not say what the next step will be.
“It’s not my move,” he said. “Assuming that’s what happened here, that the governor pulled the votes off, we should find out why the governor did that. Apparently, he wants to change the items that have been negotiated. That’s what he’s failed to do for two years.” […]
“As soon as we get word that there’s Republican support for this bipartisan plan, we’ll be ready to vote,” he said.
Everybody needs to take a deep breath here.
The Democrats need to finally understand that they can’t pass what they want to pass without the Republicans and the governor. And Gov. Rauner needs to realize that the Democrats are out of patience with the endless talks.
It can still be done, but, man, everybody has to calm down a bit first.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 8:48 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** LIVE *** Senate session coverage
Next Post: Pritzker contributions questioned
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I would add a third “breath”. The Republicans need to realize they may have to do this without Rauner. They may have to make the hard decisions and votes because of this “one more thing” meme from the Executive branch. If they were called to the “principal’s office” because of these votes and they caved, there’s not much hope that I see of anything but continued “persistence” being accomplished. Rauner wants the balls in the air. That’s his play to 2018. It’s time to let him play handball by himself instead of owning the dodge ball court.
Comment by Anon221 Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:00 am
== The Democrats need to finally understand that they can’t pass what they want to pass without the Republicans and the governor. ==
The Democrat leadership knows this. In
== And Gov. Rauner needs to realize that the Democrats are out of patience with the endless talks. ==
It’s not the endless talks so much as the rigidity of Rauner’s demands. Politics is a process of compromise, and Rauner doesn’t seem to be willing to compromise at all.
AFSCME should take note; he won’t come back to the table until the union is broken and buried.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:02 am
I wanted to believe that Rauner had the state’s best interests had heart. I cut him slack, gave him the benefit of the doubt. I can no longer do that. I have no choice but to believe he’s only following the mantra of the Proft/Koch/Norquist “strangle government until it dies” program. It appears he wanted this mess all along in the hopes a total collapse would allow private industry to be able to swoop in and take over.
I hope everything ends well, but I’m nowhere near as optimistic as I was.
Comment by Aaron1976 Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:05 am
If Sens were threatened the reporters need to find out and report it. This isn’t a he said she said walk away from it type ignore story. Get to the bottom of it and lay blame.
Comment by P. Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:05 am
CK (and the ILGOP) seem to forget that Bruce gets the final say when this arrives at his desk.
Bruce put the GB in his line item budget for Pete’s sake. Based on his tacit admission that the GB has to happen, why is Bruce meeting with anyone?
Comment by Jocko Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:06 am
Of course Rauner pulled votes at the 11th hour. He does not want a budget, any budget. How many times does he, or do his PR minions, have to sabotage budgets before it is realized that that is his game plan. Believing there is a budget in Rauner’s gubernatorial future is believing in the tooth fairy. I said here some weeks ago that Cullerton was doing the governor’s job and in for a hose job. I was asked if I were an anarchist. Rauner apparently fills that role.
Comment by My New Handle Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:06 am
I don’t think it can or will be done.
(1) Requiring that all 12 bills be in a package, that it is all or none, would appear to violate the Illinois Constitution on single issue legislation.
(2) It is like passing a 2,000 page bill in the Congress - each Senator does NOT know what is in the package of 12 bills (even more so than usual).
(3) Tying school funding reform into this (because it is said this is the only way it can pass) is inexcusable - it is so complex a subject that all sorts of unintended things will happen if it is passed in this manner.
And the public schools need very careful legislation, not this Grand Bargain.
Comment by winners and losers Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:07 am
===In remarks on the floor, Radogno didn’t dispute Cullerton’s assertion about Rauner’s involvement but urged continued work.===
Good on Leader Radogno. Rauner wants to insert himself, then look elsewhere for cover.
Rauner needs 30. Radogno and Cullerton are trying to cobble 30.
Rauner may not like all of this, but does he think the Dems like all of this too.
From yesterday, @moniquegarcia -Senate President John Cullerton rises, says Gov. Rauner “has decided to interject in this process” and doesn’t want this plan approved.
At some point, counting 30 is about… counting to 30.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:07 am
== The Republicans need to realize they may have to do this without Rauner. ==
If they were going to rebel against Rauner, it would have happened yesterday. The Democrats have moved quite a bit, and Rauner isn’t budging. Time to abandon all hope of a budget before we get a new Governor.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:07 am
I can’t stand it, I know you planned it
Come to realize, this Compromise
Never stood a chance, just song and dance.
Cause your boss would rather spend than take a stance.
So while you sit back and wonder why
I got this friggin’ thorn in my side
Oh my god, it’s a mirage
I’m tellin’ y’all, it’s sabotage
Comment by AlfondoGonz Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:10 am
===If they were going to rebel against Rauner, it would have happened yesterday.===
- RNUG -
I concur. Further, Rauner, thru Proft and IPI, marginalizing Leader Radogno and “threatening” her leadership is also a clear indication to Raunerites in the Senate, the don’t want “a $&@#% problem”.
Yesterday was the window to so autonomy. It didn’t happen.
If anything, Rauner tightened his own grip on the Senate members(?)
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:12 am
===(1) Requiring that all 12 bills be in a package, that it is all or none, would appear to violate the Illinois Constitution on single issue legislation.
(2) It is like passing a 2,000 page bill in the Congress - each Senator does NOT know what is in the package of 12 bills (even more so than usual).
(3) Tying school funding reform into this (because it is said this is the only way it can pass) is inexcusable - it is so complex a subject that all sorts of unintended things will happen if it is passed in this manner.===
Wow, that’s a lot of nonsense to unpack first thing in the morning.
1. These are 12 separate bills, so no “single-subject” issue. Can someone challenge that? Sure, but again, the bills are voted on separately, so it’s not an issue.
2. Everybody here knows pretty much all of the details of the Senate package. Rich has made it super easy to follow along, and the General Assembly web page is another awesome tool to read all of the details. Who do you think doesn’t know what is in these bills? Maybe you could send them a link to Capitol Fax so they can get up to speed.
3. School funding reform is also predicated on certain districts getting increased state aid, which requires a tax increase, especially if you plan to hold other districts “harmless.” See also property tax freeze.
Gee whiz Winners & Losers, it almost sounds like you could be working on the governor’s communications team.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:13 am
Rauner is who he always has been, and that’s someone who expects when he wants something, he will get exactly what he wants and not a thing less. He won’t compromise because he is unable to compromise.
He’s got a lifetime of experience telling others what to do and hundreds of millions of dollars to show for it. It’s much easier and more natural for him to spend his money going after people politically than it is to actually govern and there’s little reason to believe that will change any time soon.
Comment by slow down Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:15 am
==would appear to violate the Illinois Constitution on single issue legislation==
No it doesn’t. That’s why they are 12 separate bills.
==each Senator does NOT know what is in the package of 12 bills==
They’ve been briefed on what they are voting on. Besides, how would you know what they do and don’t know.
==Tying school funding reform into this (because it is said this is the only way it can pass) is inexcusable ==
School funding reform was part of the negotiated package. That’s how negotiations work.
==And the public schools need very careful legislation, not this Grand Bargain.==
This wasn’t developed overnight. It’s been negotiated over several months.
This is the sort of attitude that is keeping anything from getting done. You aren’t going to get everything you want. I agree with Senator Cullerton. Grow up.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:15 am
=AFSCME should take note; he won’t come back to the table until the union is broken and buried.=
OW is correct. The courts are the only option left for AFSCME. It’s pointless to strike. Rauner will just wait us out regardless of the it means to the state.
Comment by Dublin Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:16 am
What happened to.
“Illinois Senate Republican leader Christine Radogno says the chamber needs to vote by Feb. 28 to approve its still-evolving bipartisan “grand bargain” to end the state’s historic stalemate or go home and let Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan decide how to move the state forward.”
Comment by Bigtwich Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:16 am
So Governor, where is your balanced budget proposal since you cannot count on those Grand Bargain savings.
As a taxpayer, I demand to see your revised balance budget proposal.
Comment by A Jack Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:17 am
== …everybody has to calm down a bit first. ==
EVERYBODY? No, just one: Our FailedILGovernor needs to grow some and man up. And Do His Job! Lead. Govern.
Pick one:
Legal Definition of malfeasance: the commission (as by a public official) of a wrongful or unlawful act involving or affecting the performance of one’s duties.
Malfeasance: the performance by a public official of an act that is legally unjustified, harmful, or contrary to law; wrongdoing (used especially of an act in violation of a public trust).
Nonfeasance: the omission of some act that ought to have been performed.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:21 am
“The Democrats need to finally understand that they can’t pass what they want to pass without the Republicans and the governor.”
Rich, the Dems understand this very well, it is the Republicans whom think they never have to take any hard votes! Put blame where blame is due - the governor totally derailed the Senate’s bipartisan budget agreement.
Comment by Mama Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:24 am
===each Senator does NOT know what is in the package of 12 bills===
That’s on them. The bills and amendments are posted online. There’s no excuse.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:25 am
The governor has proven once again that he does not want a budget, and he does not know how to negotiate in good faith.
Comment by Mama Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:25 am
Nybo’s “No comment” speaks volumes.
This one is on Rauner.
Comment by Robert the Bruce Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:26 am
Bruce Rauner never wanted a deal.
Comment by Precinct Captain Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:26 am
===Rich, the Dems understand this very well===
No, they don’t.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:27 am
As a state, the 3 C’s will not cover everything until the 2018 election (continuing approps, consent decrees, and court orders). If the rebellion had to happen yesterday, then only Radogno is the lone non-Raunerite in the Senate? If other Senators are concerned, and rightfully so, about the conjoined bills, then will they be willing to work on each independently in an efficient manner, to make them palatable to the ILGA members and not worry about Rauner’s “stamp of approval”? They have the power of the vote and the ability to override vetoes. If they take the Raunerite road, we will be far past the death spiral in Illinois and totally into a black hole. Is that what their constituents want???
Comment by Anon221 Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:29 am
Rauner,Proft and IPI - use any of the three names interchangeably. Just follow the money.
Comment by Joe M Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:29 am
No deal til 2019. And if rauner gets reelected……..
Comment by Foster brooks Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:30 am
- Dublin -
While I’d love to take the credit given to - RNUG - for his continuous well thought comments, your grab is - RNUG - again being thoughtful, and I agree with him like you do.
To the Post,
This is also a real reason why Governor’s lead. Governors can’t “sit back” an then passively give a thumbs up or down, while either chamber and all four caucuses guess.
What does the governor require off these 12 bills that now are just not “enough”?
Rauner has pleaded for compromise, Leader Radogno and President Cullerton have given guidance. Swooping in to derail… Governors that govern as antagonists to 60 and 30, and only promote “my way and you get what I want to give you” are not thinking clearly to the real governing.
A scary thought, when 60 and 30 still ..is the only end game.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:30 am
I want the Legislature to represent their constituents, even those that disagree with them. Maybe we need to define that word, since it is such a big word. They are the people that can vote for you, not the people who write you big checks. Rauner is not your constituent except if he can vote in your election.
Grow up. Do your job. Even when it’s not Rauners opinion.
Comment by Thoughts Matter Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:31 am
==Tying school funding reform into this (because it is said this is the only way it can pass) is inexcusable - it is so complex a subject that all sorts of unintended things will happen if it is passed in this manner.===
47th, if you had been paying attention the last 2 years you would have noted the governor will only sign a budget for K-12 education. The only way to get a complete state budget is the include the K-12 education budget.
Comment by Mama Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:32 am
What is Plan B for no formal budget until (maybe) 2018. There must be one.
Yes, they could still get a deal. But..how many months of retroactive tax increase are politically possible (in Illinois, not in theory). Looks like we’re looking at three at a minimum. Folks might notice that more than the actual increase.
Comment by Cassandra Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:36 am
If Rauner goes into the 2018 election no budget, the Dem’s will beat him over the head with it.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:36 am
==That’s on them. The bills and amendments are posted online. There’s no excuse.==
No, the Amendment to SB 1, now a shell bill, is not posted online.
Well, 47th Ward, that is a new one - that I am working for the Governor.
I will post later the opinion of the constitutionality of the 12 bill package offered by the attorney who got the original Illinois Supreme Court ruling on single issue.
Comment by winners and losers Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:38 am
“The key is to obscure your intentions and make them unpredictable to your opponent while you simultaneously clarify his intentions. *** In very simple terms, be unpredictable.”
This sabotage is the result of Rauner’s ongoing attempt to govern exclusively by OODA Looping.
“Time to abandon all hope of a budget before we get a new Governor.”
Afraid so.
– MrJM
Comment by @MisterJayEm Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:40 am
Done with these children it’s like divorce court. Both sides are willing to destroy everything just do the other can’t claim victory. The citizens of Illinois and the children of Illinois will be paying for this Rauner ideology for years.
Comment by So tired of political hacks Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:42 am
Anonymous @9:21: Don’t forget about misfeasance. According to legal dictionary, malfeasance is an affirmative act that is illegal or wrongful. In tort law it is distinct from misfeasance, which is an act that is not illegal but is improperly performed. It is also distinct from nonfeasance, which is a failure to act that results in injury.
Comment by Steve Rogers Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:45 am
I suspect they’ll beat him over the head no matter what he does-or not. Not sure the general public terribly interested in budget vs. no budget either.
I’m not a politician, but abandoning one’s party’s governor and joining openly with the opposition strikes me as a bit risky over the long term. Unless this is your last term, I suppose.
Comment by Cassandra Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:45 am
9:36 - two things. First - you are assuming that whoever runs will have enough $$$ to get that message across. Second - all Rauner would need to retort is to say he “held the line on taxes” and “stood up to Mike Madigan at every turn”. Madigan has worse approval numbers - and is now a well-known caricature thanks to years of bad press and Rauner’s recent campaign wars - and way less people vote during a gubernatorial year than a president year.
Comment by Curl of the Burl Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:54 am
Just as #TaxHikeMike was/is the messaging of the Raunerites, it’s now time for #NoBudgetBruce to face the music as well.
Comment by CrazyHorse Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:57 am
==School funding reform was part of the negotiated package. That’s how negotiations work…This wasn’t developed overnight. It’s been negotiated over several months==
That was the Rauner Commission, as in Governor Rauner (my way or the highway Rauner).
Only now is Madigan forming a Task Force that will actually write legislation, not just take legislation written by Mike Jacoby and the school superintendents (although thank goodness the Commission did NOT agree to it).
Go to Illinois School Funding Reform Commission, listen to the 3 hours sessions, read the background, read the Draft legislation, and then come back and tell us what they did (and did not do).
Comment by winners and losers Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:58 am
===that is a new one - that I am working for the Governor.===
I didn’t mean it literally. I meant it in the sense that you appear to have the same limited grasp of the situation and share a desire to avoid getting a deal done. Like the governor’s team.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:58 am
After the smoke clears…and there’s a LOT of smoke…there is this or nothing.
Nothing is the absolute worst outcome for the Governor. If he doesn’t know it, he’ll know it soon.
As Rich says, take a breath, tinker for your best compromise, and move this monster to the house. Put pressure on someone else.
If they’re being intimidated (if!), what is the leverage? Staying in a place that has the greatest potential to lose all of it’s honor and being paid 6-8 months behind? After swearing off your pension in most cases? What leverage is that?
There are a few that may Live for this, but I’m willing to bet there’s more than that few who absolutely don’t.
It’s time to get serious.
Comment by A guy Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:58 am
Gee, didnt see that coming/s.
The broadside from proft was a tipoff that mr persistence was about to undermine the deal.
Madigan was probably thinking, “i told you so.”
Comment by Langhorne Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:01 am
Time for Cullerton to pull back. He tried, but Rauner wanted to bleed him dry.
Best hope is for AG Madigan to win the pay issue in court.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:01 am
===all Rauner would need to retort is to say he “held the line on taxes” and “stood up to Mike Madigan at every turn”.===
Rauner will also face signing the Rauner Tax, arguably the largest permenant tax increase in Illinois history.
Rauner knows… he needs what he wants to get past what will hurt HIM with a deal.
A governor that proposes 3 phony unbalanced budgets and still sees Revenue is a give may fail no matter the end result, deal or not.
So… Rauner holding out… Rauner agreeing… Rauner needs damage control for all the damage he, Rauner, has caused… Thus… “why not” force his own wants?
It’s not good faith or driving for 30 in the Senate but Rauner and the politics behind the blowing up of things makes sense… to Rauner.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:03 am
RNUG/OW, apologies for the mix-up.
Have to wonder if Rauner takes a different tone if the TRO regarding state pay was removed. Would Rauner still refuse the bargain if it meant no appropriation for state workers? Maybe, maybe not.
It appears the AG was right when she said that was the piece needed to urge the compromise.
Comment by Dublin Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:06 am
===If Rauner goes into the 2018 election no budget, the Dem’s will beat him over the head with it.
Really ? The average voter (those not concerned with the minutia of things such as a veto proof numbers, or the Gov’s responsibility under the constitution) just might blame the Dems. MJM and his 30 year reign as leader, linked to large Dem majorities in both houses makes a strong argument that blame can just as easily be placed at their feet.
Comment by Texas Red Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:06 am
- Texas Red -
Nah.
“Pat Quinn failed” - Governors own.
Same as it ever was. Not a new or unusual concept, not an easily thwarted truth.
That’s why incumbents need results and challegers needs failures. Governors own.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:11 am
=== “I have no question in my mind that we’re going to bring this thing in for a landing,” Radogno said. “There’s enough good will in this building. I know the governor will be joining us in trying to get that done.” ===
I wonder if the Minority Leader really believes an agreement is right around the corner? Does she think Democrats will concede every point to Rauner and get no concessions in return?
It’s unfortunate, but this probably means no budget before 2019.
Nonfeasance at minimum.
Comment by Anon Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:15 am
Does the path forward involve K-12 not opening on time later this fall? I know it’s not a very palatable path forward for either side but education seems to be one of the few arenas where #NoBudgetBruce seems to be more of a bogeyman than #TaxHikeMike.
It’s not too early to be fearful of another 4 years of Rauner. I’d like to think he’ll be easily defeated but I live in Will County and I hear people all of the time blaming Madigan. I know it’s only anecdotal evidence, but Rauner has support for what he is doing. A big part of it is that few people outside of social services and higher ed have felt any significant pain as a result of his tactics.
Comment by CrazyHorse Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:17 am
OW ==Governors own.
- I normally would agree with that logic . But Illinois is perhaps the exception. Show me another state where the legislative leader is the subject to what seems like regular expose’s on his record setting reign and power over state government. MJM’s power can be seen through many lenses - it is a useful tool for his allies, it is to be feared by his opponents, but is also notorious to the voters.
Comment by Texas Red Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:22 am
Where is AG Madigan’s appeal to a higher court regarding payment without appropriation?
Comment by Kevin Highland Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:26 am
Ragnarok got real for the Senate
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:27 am
“I have no question in my mind that we’re going to bring this thing in for a landing…”
OW, just like the AA Executive Shuttle!
To the post, I could be 100% wrong, but I think the general concept of tying a batch of bills together with a “veto one-all die” was shot down quite a few years ago. Looking forward to see what W & L comes up with.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:30 am
The blame is easily spread around to all. It certainly looks like the Governor doesn’t want a budget under any circumstances that will head his way.
Schools need to NOT open on time in the fall. It’s the only way to get the publics full attention. Rauner wants to burn it down. The dems should get the higher ground back and pass nothing that funds schools. Then the Governor owns it.
Comment by Echo The Bunnyman Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:30 am
===But Illinois is perhaps the exception.===
No.
Here’s why.
Democrats, social services, Labor, college students, the fringe, the “enough” of these groups that helped Rauner beat Quinn just two years ago seem to be disenchanted with Rauner, as Rauner himself is upside-down in polling.
If Rauner was polling well, you’d have an argument, your argument would be even stronger if polling had Rauner beating a generic Dem opponent.
Rauner will try to run against Madigan, but like Munger, the statewide feelings seem to indicate in a proxy battle, Rauner isn’t close to be out of the woods.
Governors always own. It’s no different.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:33 am
Texas Red you are gaslighting.
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:37 am
The single subject clause of the Illinois Constitution of 1970 provides, in relevant part: “Bills, except bills for appropriations and for the codification, revision or rearrangement of laws, shall be confined to one subject.” Ill. Const. 1970, art. IV, §8(d). The single subject rule regulates the process by which legislation is enacted. People v. Cervantes, 189 Ill. 2d 80, 83 (1999). As this court has stated:
” ‘The history and purpose of this constitutional provision are too well understood to require any elucidation at our hands. The practice of bringing together into one bill subjects diverse in their nature, and having no necessary connection, with a view to combine in their favor the advocates of all, and thus secure the passage of several measures, no one of which could succeed upon its own merits, was one both corruptive of the legislator and dangerous to the State.’ ” Fuehrmeyer v. City of Chicago, 57 Ill. 2d 193, 202 (1974), quoting People ex rel. Drake v. Mahaney, 13 Mich. 481, 494-95 (1865).
The single subject rule is designed to prevent the passage of legislation that, if standing alone, could not muster the necessary votes for enactment. Sypien, 198 Ill. 2d at 338. The practice of bundling less popular legislation with more palatable bills so that the well-received bills would carry the unpopular ones to passage is known as “logrolling.” Cervantes, 189 Ill. 2d at 98.
In addition to preventing logrolling, the single subject rule also facilitates the enactment of bills through an orderly and informed legislative process. Cervantes, 189 Ill. 2d at 83-84.
By limiting a bill to a single subject, legislators can better understand and more intelligently debate the issues presented by a bill. People v. Reedy, 186 Ill. 2d 1, 14 (1999).
The single subject clause thus promotes direct confrontation and informed discussion of legislative issues submitted for enactment. Reedy, 186 Ill. 2d at 14.
In addition, “the single subject rule ensures that the legislature addresses the difficult decisions it faces directly and subject to public scrutiny, rather than passing unpopular measures on the backs of popular ones.” Johnson v. Edgar, 176 Ill. 2d 499, 515 (1997).
Comment by winners and losers Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:40 am
A good direct mail piece would be, pictures of Bruce’s 9 mansion saying, I’ve got 9 mansions, how many have you got?
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:40 am
==I think the general concept of tying a batch of bills together with a “veto one-all die” was shot down quite a few years ago==
There have been other bills that have done this. If I’m not mistaken I can remember budget bills and BIMP bills that have done this. I could be wrong.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:41 am
== A good direct mail piece would be, pictures of Bruce’s 9 mansion saying, I’ve got 9 mansions, how many have you got? ==
Better would be:
I’ve got 9 mansions and I just cut my property taxes 9 times!
And yes, I know they aren’t all in Illinois, but facts don’t seem to matter these days …
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:44 am
winners and losers, nice research effort, but single subject doesn’t matter worth a hill of beans if the legislation doesn’t pass.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:44 am
Rauner has enough money to control all the messaging. He’ll destroy the state and the citizens will keep re-electing him to do it more.
Comment by filmmaker prof Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:45 am
==try to run against Madigan, but like Munger, the statewide feelings seem to indicate in a proxy battle
The GOP grabbed 6 seats in the General Assembly in November, 4 in the House and 2 in the Senate. A constant in all these races was the GOP campaigns linked the Dem to MJM.
Comment by Texas Red Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:46 am
Rauner has, by far, the most powerful state office and his network is virtually the sole funder of the Illinois GOP.
He’s the Boss, his is the only GOP vote that counts.
Letting Radogno pretend that she had a bit of independence to negotiate even the beginnings of a deal was a p.r. exercise to make Rauner look like Mr. Rogers. Once the attacks against her from his propaganda payrollers started coming, you knew it was a farce.
Still, a nasty thing to do to Radogno.
There’s no point including the GOP leaders or caucuses in any future “negotiations.” Rauner owns them like The Kingfish owned the Long faction in Louisiana back in the day. They’re bought and paid for and will do what they’re told.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:46 am
=Does the path forward involve K-12 not opening on time later this fall? I know it’s not a very palatable path forward for either side but education seems to be one of the few arenas where #NoBudgetBruce seems to be more of a bogeyman than #TaxHikeMike.=
There are likely only two paths forward and this is one of them. The other would be the ILSC ruling that employees can’t be paid without an appropriation.
Rauner essentially wants a government shutdown on his terms. And as a few other commenters have noted many people in this state don’t seem to care that we don’t have a budget because they don’t feel impacted by the absence. No state services or K-12 funding would change things quickly.
The problem at this point is that there is no “grand bargain” without a tax increase. For Rauner he has to be able to claim some sort of victory (reform) that makes this increase worthwhile. But with the passage of time the inevitable tax increase only becomes larger and Rauner’s ability to get any significant “reforms” diminish. That’s why a two year freeze on property taxes doesn’t work. It’s simply not enough to justify the income tax increase.
The way things are shaping up right now Rauner would own a very large tax increase without any meaningful off-setting benefits to show that it was worth the pain we’ve endured for the last two years and will continue to endure through higher taxes.
None of this points to compromise.
Comment by Pundent Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:46 am
IMHO, the Governor’s injecting himself into the grand bargain the way he has in recent days is more about his grand plan to triangulate Speaker Madigan. He already controls the Republicans in the GA. If he can squeeze more of what he wants from the Senate President, then the IPI, Proft, IMA, State Chamber and the State GOP can really dial up what the polls tell them is a winning “Because…Madigan” strategy.
Comment by GA Watcher Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:47 am
Demoralized, AA, winners and losers, the capital bill was challenged on the premise that since the enactment of the legislation was contingent on other bills being enacted into law. The argument was that it was in violation of the single subject rule and the presentment clause.
In Wirtz v Quinn, the Supreme Court ruled that making one bill contingent on the passage of another bill was not in violation of the constitution. (Though there is a crack for it to be unconstitutional in the future.)
Comment by Juice Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:55 am
What I know is what I’ve witnessed, a governor willing to do absolutely anything to get a political win, except do his job.
Rauner doesn’t want compromises. He doesn’t want a budget. He doesn’t want solutions. He is a persistent rascal, someone who would sabotage his own investments, just to gain a penny.
Worst person to run a government, ever.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:57 am
yesterday in his presser, Cullerton suggested that maybe the Governor has some “bad advisers”. I think that notion is really, really worth exploring. Cullerton had another gem too: “They don’t have the leverage they think they have.” As an aside, does it really matter if they are bad advisers if he doesn’t listen to anyone? Just kicking the old ball around here
Comment by swIFT taylor Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 11:03 am
===The GOP grabbed 6 seats in the General Assembly in November, 4 in the House and 2 in the Senate. A constant in all these races was the GOP campaigns linked the Dem to MJM.===
… and the real difference between districts and statewide races.
Apples to Oranges.
Rauner needs to win statewide, not districts.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 11:04 am
Christine Radogno is a good person, good legislator, and always operates in good faith, but she is almost entirely inconsequential in Bruce Rauner’s Springfield.
Cullerton might as well negotiate with the security guard in the Capitol Building parking lot — that guy can deliver only one fewer vote in the Senate than Radogno can.
Comment by Roman Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 11:14 am
=The GOP grabbed 6 seats in the GA=
& it only cost Rauner $6 million.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 11:20 am
“Effective January 1, 2018, but this Act does not take effect at all unless Senate Bills 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, and 16 of the 100th General Assembly become law.”
It’s going to be hard to argue single-subject when you have to explain all of these different bills to the court. Lol.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 11:28 am
Bruce Rauner, and the Senate Republicans he controls.
Comment by Nick Name Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 11:45 am
=As an aside, does it really matter if they are bad advisers if he doesn’t listen to anyone?=
I think we know who these “advisers” are and trust me Rauner is listening.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 11:49 am
Just an idea for our legislators, governor, and AFSCME. Each of you has supporters and, well, yes, enemies. If you continue paying off supporters with with give-a-ways and continue on this destructive fiscal path, you will go down in history as the ABSOLUTE WORST politicians/labor organization to run any state in the US EVER! 13 BILLION!!
We are a state divided. Neither side’s supporters will ever support the other side. So, logically, if you all, (democrat and republican legislators with AFSCME), make drastic cuts to services (DEMS), pay more for health care and retirement (AFSCME) and raise taxes (REPUBS), you won’t lose any supporters in the long run.
Just give up already on mantras that are unproductive: unconstitutional pension reform, unfettered privatization will save money, property tax freezes, and “the state will crumble without social services and MAP grants”. Illinois citizens know better so just fix this thing correctly for a change. 13 Billion reasons why Illinois just needs tough love across the board.
Comment by notbuyingit Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 12:02 pm
Say it ain’t so Governor Compromise!
Comment by Generic Drone Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 12:16 pm
There is so much going on in the discussion of the failure of the grand bargain strategy that really all I can try to address are aspects of the supposed education funding reform component. I am totally shocked by Senator Manar’s quote the he expected “that there was a bipartisan agreement on school funding” ready to roll over the last three days. How is that possible, when Senator Manar has not provided his own Bunker Hill Community Unit District 8 or any other district, with any spreadsheet on the fiscal impact to his school district using variables in the evidence based model (basically HB 2828 for the model or see http://illinoisvision2020.org/legislation/ ).
So for example if the State can fund the model with an additional $500 million a year over last year’s appropriation what would CUD 8’s funding look like? What would it look like if the funding is at an additional $500 million but the property tax freeze was implemented? What would it look like at an even lower funding level? When realistically could CUD 8 expect the model to be fully funded?
When one looks at the model it is fairly obvious that is complex as are all school funding models. Probably too complex and expensive for Illinois right now. Why not something radically simple, like looking at the very weakest funded school districts in Illinois with the highest property tax burdens and giving additional direct grants to them from funds that are available? Clearly that approach can’t fix everything that is wrong, but it won’t hurt better funded districts and get more wealthy families currently paying big dollar property taxes worked up that their districts are being ripped off.
Manar, Cullerton, Radogno, and the Governor want big legislative solutions for our big problems when right now maybe only a few small things can be done with the State treading water to keep from drowning.
Comment by Rod Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 12:40 pm
Print this…if you want to tell the whole truth?…and if you are as “politics” smart as I believe you to be.
Senator Andy Manar (D-Bunker Hill) issued the following statement tonight regarding Gov. Bruce Rauner’s apparent interference in today’s Illinois Senate grand bargain negotiations:
“How many times will the state’s great negotiator slam the door on opportunities to negotiate? He’s refused to negotiate a state budget for two years. Now he won’t allow Republican senators to negotiate a state budget in the best interest of their constituents. And he refuses to negotiate a contract with thousands of state workers.
“They say that if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. I think that in light of today’s developments we can say without a doubt that Governor Rauner is the problem. He doesn’t want a budget. He wants to control everyone around him. That’s not how this works.”- Senator Manar
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 12:42 pm
===School funding reform was part of the negotiated package. That’s how negotiations work…This wasn’t developed overnight. It’s been negotiated over several months==
That was the Rauner Commission, as in Governor Rauner (my way or the highway Rauner).
Only now is Madigan forming a Task Force that will actually write legislation, not just take legislation written by Mike Jacoby and the school superintendents (although thank goodness the Commission did NOT agree to it).=
Work on school funding has been going on, in earnest, for nearly two years.
Two of MJM’s lieutenant’s have been actively involved for more than a year.
Most of that was not happening publicly until this past fall. Which is usually how things work.
@Winner’s and loser’s- the concept that a bunch of politicians, worried about reelection are more capable of developing a school funding solution than superintendents is simply laughable.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 12:49 pm
Wow BigBrain has missed yet another opportunity through incredible bungling. Had he kept the gag order on the stooges at the IPI and locked up Proft’s clown car he could have got the Senate to make a lot of bad votes and eased some of HIS governing/operations problems …instead failure…many continue to wonder how he made so much money
Comment by Annonin' Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 12:49 pm
Que the Beasties “Sabotage” now. Rauner out. Next!
Comment by El Conquistador Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 12:52 pm
The budget dance will continue; problem is; the Democrats have two left feet.
Comment by Zimmy Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 12:56 pm
==the concept that a bunch of politicians, worried about reelection are more capable of developing a school funding solution than superintendents is simply laughable==
I know some school superintendents often think they know it all, but to turn over State decisions on school funding to superintendents is ridiculous.
Please read Rod’s comments above just posted.
There needs to be active involvement from groups that did not (or were not allowed to) present testimony/evidence to the Rauner Commission.
Comment by winners and losers Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 12:59 pm
What blows my mind is that, even on the pension reform bill, only a small handful of GOP members supported it–and that’s a GOP ask in the package!! The Dems are doing the heavy lift even on the bills they don’t want.
If the Governor and the GOP really want a deal, they have to produce votes. Period. If you can’t put more than 9 votes on a bill, then you can’t make maximalist demands.
Comment by ILPundit Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 1:10 pm
===If you can’t put more than 9 votes on a bill, then you can’t make maximalist demands.===
^^^^This^^^^
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 1:35 pm
My post did not suggest that school funding reform be determined by school superintendents, but at least school boards, parent organizations, teachers, and property tax payers should be able to examine the impact of the evidence based model using a number of variables for the school district they live in.
This has been done for all prior attempts at revising the funding model, but not as of yet for the evidence based model except by school districts themselves where they created their own models and have not made them public. No legislation should proceed until the school districts, teachers, public, and parents know what might be coming at them. Is there a risk of blowing up the model once the spreadsheets are out, yes there is.
But this whole issue if it is about equity between districts can begin to be addressed with direct grants to the most distressed school districts without creating a fund holding millions and millions of hold harmless dollars, panels to determine regionalized wages, and on and on. We do not have the money for all of this. Keep it simple and do what can be done, we all know there are school districts out there in deep trouble much deeper than CPS is in right now.
Comment by Rod Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 3:22 pm
VanillaMan, I miss your songs.
Comment by Mama Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 3:24 pm
= but at least school boards, parent organizations, teachers, and property tax payers should be able to examine the impact of the evidence based model using a number of variables for the school district they live in.=
So everyone but experts in the field unless they are wait for it……. “taxpayers”. Because superintendents apparently are not “taxpayers”.
So what you are really saying is you want to see if you get more or less money under the model.
Then just man up and say that.
The numbers are available. You just have to know who to ask. Your superintendent knows.
=can begin to be addressed with direct grants to the most distressed school districts without creating a fund holding millions and millions of hold harmless dollars, panels to determine regionalized wages, and on and on. We do not have the money for all of this. Keep it simple and do what can be done, we all know there are school districts out there in deep trouble much deeper than CPS is in right now.=
The one size fits all does not work.
“Grants” to districts is a prime opportunity for political rewards/punishment.
A system, that determines need based on desired education outcomes, not simply a funding distribution model, is exactly what is appropriate for education and worth waiting for.
It will take into consideration local available resources that offsets for districts that are not accessing (taxing) at an appropriate level (under taxing) to gain more money form the state, and what it should cost a district, based on its unique characteristics, to educate their students.
Maybe you want the simple version, I want the right one tied to student learning objectives and accountability.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 4:03 pm
==The average voter (those not concerned with the minutia of things such as a veto proof numbers, or the Gov’s responsibility under the constitution) just might blame the Dems. MJM and his 30 year reign as leader, linked to large Dem majorities in both houses makes a strong argument that blame can just as easily be placed at their feet.==
Rauner’s approval ratings already suck, so the “average voter” isn’t on board. And the Dems probably aren’t going to nominate Mike Madigan for Governor.
I mean, his money can save him, for sure. But it’s gonna have to.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 4:11 pm
==The numbers are available. You just have to know who to ask. Your superintendent knows….I want the right one tied to student learning objectives and accountability==
Yes, for the school funding plan written by the school superintendents, SOME of the superintendents know how each district would be affected (but almost no one else knows).
The plan is NOT TIED to student learning objectives. In fact almost all of State money can be spent as the local school district (really as the superintendent) decides.
Extreme local control - just what superintendents have always wanted: money without accountability.
Comment by winners and losers Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 6:40 pm
JS I don’t trust the Superintendents any more than the politicians. When the local school boards have to pay a larger portion of the retirement for the Superintendent I’ll listen to them. There is no skin in the game now. There is no model attached to student learning. The biggest joke are the Superintendent and principal associations. They get TRS for their leaders for goodness sakes. They are at the table for everything. Until the cost shift happens, I don’t trust anything to change. If you want local control then all of it. The New Trier Superintendent will retire and the 350,000 salary will be paid by the people of Charleston? Gross.
Comment by Eh. Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 10:24 pm
I think the Democrats realize they cannot enact something without the Republicans and the governor.
They also understand that some things are worse than nothing.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 11:10 pm
As many have said, including myself, for two years…..he doesn’t care. This is just a hobby, a game, that’s all.
Comment by DuPage Bard Friday, Mar 3, 17 @ 12:19 am
==In Wirtz v Quinn, the Supreme Court ruled that making one bill contingent on the passage of another bill was not in violation of the constitution. (Though there is a crack for it to be unconstitutional in the future.)==
The Court left a HUGE crack for it to be unconstitutional.
That was an entirely different situation where the bills were all related.
Here is a summary:
Taxpayers challenged three substantive bills and one appropriation bill, part of capital projects, signed by the governor in July 2009.
The appellate court held that Public Act 96–34 violated the single-subject clause of the Illinois Constitution, and that the other acts were invalid because they were contingent on enactment of Public Act 96–34.
The supreme court reversed, reinstating the trial court’s dismissal.
All of the substantive provisions in Act 96–34 are connected to capital projects; they establish revenue sources to be deposited into the Capital Projects Fund or are related to the overall subject of the Act in that they help implement other provisions.
The court upheld the other acts against single-subject challenges, including challenges based on the contingency clauses. Nothing in the state constitution prohibits making legislation contingent on a separate legislative enactment. The enactments did not violate the separation of powers doctrine, public funds clause, uniformity clause, or run afoul of constitutional veto procedures. An enactment that authorizes expenditure of public funds for a public purpose is not unconstitutional for incidental benefit to private interests. There is nothing constitutionally impermissible about the inclusion of the “as approximated below” language.
Comment by winners and losers Friday, Mar 3, 17 @ 12:54 am
winners and losers:
First of all I think you must have a personal beef with the school funding issue. If you don’t then I apologize but it seems to me you have some skin in the game somewhere and have been wronged by someone.
Second, if the bills pass and you’re bent out of shape by it then file a lawsuit. Stop bellyaching about it and do something about it.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Mar 3, 17 @ 8:57 am
I get a kick out of people who whine about this sort of stuff. Local school boards hire the Superintendents. You don’t like the Superintendent? Complain to the board. Run for the board yourself. Don’t sit in the cheap seats complaining.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Mar 3, 17 @ 8:58 am
Demoralized: I am trying to present the facts on the Illinois Supreme Court cases, on the origin of the Evidence Based proposal and the flaws in it.
Why not address the facts instead of a personal attack (without any evidence)?
Comment by winners and losers Friday, Mar 3, 17 @ 9:06 am