Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: A look at some of Pritzker’s increased spending
Next Post: Two vastly different ways of addressing the issue of consent
Posted in:
* Background is here if you need it. From the AP…
Reporters were briefed on the details after the speech by deputy Gov. Dan Hynes and Pritzker budget director Alexis Sturm, but the governor’s press office prohibited reporters from quoting the two directly. The Associated Press chose not to participate.
* Tina Sfondeles participated and slipped this little quote into her story…
Regarding delaying pensions payments — which many have scoffed at — Hynes said it is the “sensible” thing to do with an unsustainable ramp that forces the state to dedicate 21 percent of revenue to pensions.
Heh. Let ‘em complain about that.
* Because she went to the briefing, Tina’s story had some info that the AP’s story lacked. For instance…
Should that new revenue package fail, the administration would propose a 4 percent cut to all state agencies, Deputy Gov. Dan Hynes said in a budget briefing Wednesday afternoon. A budget document stated those cuts would work to fill a budget gap but wouldn’t include employee health care or pension and debt service costs.
But the AP’s story was good, too.
I skipped the briefing, not because of the restrictions, but because I have my own system for covering these proposals which has always worked pretty well for me. The object here is to get the information to your readers. We all have our own way of doing that. The AP chose one path, the Sun-Times chose another and I went a different route.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 10:25 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: A look at some of Pritzker’s increased spending
Next Post: Two vastly different ways of addressing the issue of consent
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
A four percent cut to all state agencies.
Now that’s an idea I can support.
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 10:32 am
“but wouldn’t include employee health care or pension and debt service costs.”
Help please
What does this mean exactly?
Does this mean that employee healthcare would be cut more than the 4%?
I shared my concerns yesterday about Pritzker increasing our healthcare along the lines of Rauners dream 120% to start and eventual elimination as RNUG divulged.
Is this confirming my fears? Or have I got it wrong? Please help me understand so I can pass it along to my fellow Oompa Loompas.
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 10:37 am
All who went to the briefing should have just ignored the Pritzker flacks’ “prohibition.” Who do they think they are, anyway?
This boneheaded, heavy-handed attempt at manipulation bears watching. Not a good look.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 10:40 am
“governor’s press office prohibited reporters from quoting the two directly”
Is this routine for briefings like this?
Because, routine or not, I don’t care for it.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 10:40 am
Over-the-top attempt to dictate to reporters how to cover news.
Those kinds of prohibitions aren’t the pressroom norm and reflect and won’t wear well over time, but am sure the new administration will change course on these things.
Comment by West Wing Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 10:43 am
=but the governor’s press office prohibited reporters from quoting the two directly.=
Um………the governor’s press office prohibited the press form reporting?
Comment by TinyDancer(FKASue) Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 10:51 am
=but the governor’s press office prohibited reporters from quoting the two directly. =
So, they’re dictating what the press can report….does that make them dictators?
Comment by TinyDancer(FKASue) Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 10:54 am
===So, they’re dictating what the press can report===
Background briefings are common in government.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 10:55 am
Honey Bear, since employee healthcare was lumped in with pension and debt service I’m going to guess no it’s not being cut. Really though we won’t know until the new contract gets negotiated. Definitely too early to get scared about it.
I wonder what assumptions go into the 4% as opposed to the 15% “pure cut” scenario JB talked about in the speech.
And Ble Dog, 4% cut to DCFS, ISBE, ISP, etc? We talk all the time here about how many state agencies have been hollowed out and can barely do their jobs, and you’ll celebrate cutting them further? Think before you speak please.
Comment by Perrid Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 10:56 am
Perrin. Because some people talk about the hollowing out state agencies as a bad thing. Others think of it as a good thing. JB won the election. Handily. He gets to own. He will get to own the inevitable tax increase as well.
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 11:05 am
Blue Dog Dem, you talk about hollowing out of state agencies as a good thing because you haven’t the slightest idea how state government works or what has not been functioning because of the Rauner impasse. Pritzker has a very aggressive agenda,
which can be passed,
which can be legislated
But design and decision of the candy
Does not produce the candy.
Oompa Loompa Stateworkers
Make the chocolate bars
I’m asking as an oompa loompa
if the oompa loopas
Are going to get culled/beaten/starved/abused
by a Pritzker Administration.
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 11:14 am
BDD, if you celebrate across the board budget cuts, I suspect that you don’t have direct knowledge of any specific agency or how well they are performing their current mission. They have had these cuts for 20 (or more) years, and most have trimmed to the bone.
Perhaps a less offensive way to phrase your usual complaint is that an agency’s mission is too broad and needs to be narrowed, which would reduce costs. Allowing agencies to “do less with less” is more sensible, but you also never get around to discussing what services you want to have less of.
Comment by Jibba Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 11:16 am
What the benefit to the state that when spouses both work for the state, they each have to carry their own health insurance? Wouldn’t it be cheaper for the state to have one spouse be on the other spouses plan?
Comment by Former State Employee 2 Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 11:23 am
Honey. I respectfully disagree with you on my knowledge of any state agencies. But obviously I would use a scalpel and not an axe. But we must blend revenue increases with spending cuts. Tough,tough decisions need to be made. At the end of the day, Illinois state govt must get back to the essential core duties it needs to perform.
Jibbw. I agree with your second paragraph in many ways. As to specific cuts, I have listed many, many on this blog over time. And I realize most of them are not politically popular and would cause somebody real pain. Clawing our way out of this mess ain’t gonna be pretty or pain free. When the inevitable income tax increases hit, are they going to be pain free.?
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 11:33 am
Honeybear and Perrid - I work for the state. I agree with Bd. Although I would say 4% is a good starting point and you can go from there…
Comment by Captain Obvious Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 11:38 am
=Background briefings are common in government.=
But it doesn’t have to be that way. It’s not transparent. It puts the government in charge of the reportage and gags the journalists. Not exactly what one would call “freedom of the press.”
Comment by TinyDancer(FKASue) Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 11:43 am
Blue Dog Dem,
Do you currently, or have you worked in a State Government Agency? Yes or no
If yes, How long?
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 11:44 am
==and would cause somebody real pain===
BDD, since the purpose of government is to provide services, especially for those who cannot fully fund them for themselves, isn’t the best strategy to spread that pain out as much as possible, so that no one shoulders a burden too heavy? Such as putting the pension system shortfall on the backs of the few hundred thousand current and former state workers, rather than on 12M citizens who all benefitted from artificially low tax rates.
==When the inevitable income tax increases hit, are they going to be pain free?=== I don’t think pain is the word. Discomfort, perhaps. Even making a progressive tax will not be painful. Unpleasant, perhaps, but again, the true pain is felt by those who cannot afford college, medicine, child care, food, etc. Those who can pay a little more should be expected to, when the stakes are this high.
Comment by Jibba Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 11:44 am
Captain Obvious- what agency and how long?
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 11:49 am
Honey. No. Not for. But many with.
IDOR
IDPH
IDNR
DCEO
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 11:55 am
“ I skipped the briefing, not because of the restrictions, but because I have my own system for covering these proposals which has always worked pretty well for me. The object here is to get the information to your readers. We all have our own way of doing that. The AP chose one path, the Sun-Times chose another and I went a different route.”
I must say that after meeting Rich on Tuesday evening that I totally trust the way you do your work. Great Job Rich and thanks for the picture. I have already told many people how nice it was to finally meet the Man himself.
Comment by German Pete Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 11:58 am
===an unsustainable ramp that forces the state to dedicate 21 percent of revenue to pensions.===
If Hayes thinks spending 21% of revenues on pensions is unsustainable today, what does he see in the future?
Reducing pension contributions below last year’s level is bleepin’ nuts.
Pensions are going to require taxes - taxes measured in billions, not millions.
Comment by Ebenezer Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 12:14 pm
Jibba and Honey. Thanks for civil dialogue. It’s the way adults can disagree.
Jibba. Artificially low income taxes don’t tell the whole story as you know. Excessively high property taxes bring the poor and middle class to their knees.
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 12:28 pm
Jibba, I’m sorry, but state’s should be providing very few services beyond roads, law enforcement and education.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 12:32 pm
BDD, agreed, and thanks. Your comment about property tax is certainly right, but isn’t that another argument for an increased income tax?
A previous comment got trapped, but I asked what it was about your experience with those agencies that made you think that they could be cut or their mission narrowed.
Comment by JIbba Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 12:33 pm
And our state is basically run by and for government with little regard to most of the citizens.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 12:34 pm
Okay, so I’m reminding myself of my Capfax resolution to be more respectful.
so here it goes.
BBD- I just finished up a great book that I think might be interesting to you.
Winners Take All by Giridharadas
The reason why I suggest it is because of something which I see you doing. (I probably do it too. Feel free to bust me. I always admit it when I’m wrong.)
I think you would find interesting how what the author calls proponents of “MarketWorld” which I think you are (which I suspect JB is), make pronouncements, policy’s, decisions, actions without any real input from those directly affected or involved. Not only does this directly expand and perpetuate non democratic systems but inequality and elitism in all its forms.
Thus you issue edict without really knowing what you’re talking about. Working with is NOT the same and working for. Even working for can be segmented to where folks like Captain Obvious who may perhaps work in an agency or office that is fine. Maybe DoIt who got all kinds of funding. But where I work and the stateworker friends I interact with socially are all in firm agreement that state agencies are non functional husks. Rich has reported extensively on this AND we are just now discovering the damage. Tip of the iceberg. And along you come saying “cut’em 5%” it’s good for em.
Dude, I’m not on your lawn
You’re on mine, or at least my coworkers lawn.
The point of the book is that we are where we are today because of an ever widening gap between the
“elite, privileged, monied, powerful”
and vast majority of individuals
that actually
do the work.
JB Wonka
Blue Dog Dem et al
have no
idea
what the needs of the oompa loompas are.
They don’t have any idea
What the oompa loompas do.
They just want the chocolate
faster and cheaper
It makes me appreciate RNUG, Wordslinger, and Oswego Willie all the more.
They have taken the time to
know what goes into the making of the candy.
Some have helped to make it.
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 12:35 pm
BDD at 11:55. I am assuming that means you were a contractor for those Agencies?
Comment by Just A Dude Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 12:35 pm
Jibba, We can’t afford to fund all the services due to our pension obligations and already onerous tax levels. Spending has to be cut.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 12:35 pm
Anon 12:32
I think you’re missing a lot of what the state does, including protecting the environment, managing state lands, promoting business, regulating professions, and most importantly helping people in need, including medicaid, senior assistance, child protection, and many other things. If you don’t want that, other states might suit a rugged individualist like yourself. Laboratories of democracy, you know.
And when people say we can’t afford it, what they really mean is that they don’t want to pay for it. A tax increase of 2% would cover the pensions. Is that impossible? No, nor would it drive the moving vans.
Comment by Jibba Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 12:43 pm
Jib. We all have both horror and exceptionalism stories when dealing with state agencies I am sure. But my experience as a small business owner tells me there is always room for a wee bit of savings. You just have to make the tough choices.
I had lamented here frequently about SIUC wasting money. I was told they were down to the bare bones. My late dear friend Chancellor ‘C’ and I met over lunch and I brought a few things to his attention. He was amazed. In less than a weeks time he slashed $275k and another $33k annually. I only knew’C’ for a short time. He will be missed.
I won’t detail my bad experiences with the aforementioned agencies. It’s pointless. But IMO, I could find some cost cutting ideas.
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 12:50 pm
Just a Dude. No. I worked with IDPH on three nursing homes that I was involved with. Extensive year(s) long interactions. IDOR and DCEO and numerous occasions as a small business owner. And IDNR from shooting complex to Lake Kincaid development and watershed preservation efforts.
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 12:56 pm
“But my experience as a small business owner tells me there is always room for a wee bit of savings. You just have to make the tough choices.”
And yet you duck those tough choices by trumpeting across the board budget cuts.
Be tough, tough guy — tell us your choices.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 1:21 pm
@Honeybear -
It was a foolish mistake to float a backup plan calling for a 4% across-the-Board cut.
You cannot blame the fish for frenzying after the administration chummed the water.
Comment by Mad Maxx Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 1:21 pm
Mad Maxx, after the trauma of the last few years.
I just don’t care if it was a mistake or not.
I just don’t care if it’s just an idea.
I just don’t care who says it anymore.
I’m gonna fight like a pissed off bear.
I am DONE
being held hostage to agendas.
Regardless whose agenda it is.
You don’t beat the help
You don’t abuse the Oompa Loompas
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 1:42 pm
It’s reasonable to cut spending across the board when the state can’t afford it’s current level of expenditures. Why target one agency and favor another? Keep it simple and fair.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 3:01 pm
“Keep it simple and fair.”
It is in actuality neither simple or fair
Even when you are given the mandate of 5% say
you can’t cut 5% off of all line items
Choices must be made
This necessarily involves value judgments
thus complexity
AND
making value judgments always mean
somebody is going to think its unfair.
But that totally ignores
The absolute fact
State Agencies are just about at collapse
understaffed and underfunded
at best.
nonfunctional at worst.
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 3:25 pm
Ugh. I hate across-the-board cuts. They penalize efficient managers and reward those who build fat into their operations.
Comment by Soccermom Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 3:31 pm
captain obvious —- it’s ‘only’ 4% until your job / contract / program is on the line. Then it becomes the end of the world.
Comment by 312 Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 3:45 pm
Across the board cuts also neglect which agencies have taken the brunt of cuts over the past 20 years. Nor do they reflect the critical nature of some operations relative to other necessary but non critical functions. Nor are these cuts likely to target any fat that may remain in some agencies due to cronyism or favoritism, which is difficult to root out completely in any human endeavor.
Comment by Jibba Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 4:06 pm
Blue Dog Dem
I like how you support a 4% cut at all agencies, however I bet you would not be in favor of union jobs being cut. Which let’s be honest are probably the ones that should be cut.
Comment by Macomb Matt Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 5:12 pm
A 4% cut to all agencies is easier said than done. Agencies like DCFS are struggling enough as is and then if you say a 4% cut “back office” is more likely to be cut. So you save some front line employees, but now you have less people to do things like contract or grant compliance so there’s less people to make sure tax dollars are being spent efficiently. Keeping in mind that those types of position have been being reduced for years. Not saying that there’s not programs that could be reduced, but a blanket across the board is rarely the right way to go.
Comment by MyTwoCents Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 5:12 pm
Ok. Can we agree with 2%? 1%? Make me happy. Just give me something before my kids income tax and property tax goes up again. Please.
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Thursday, Feb 21, 19 @ 5:58 pm
Have you been bankrupted by state property taxes? Call Peter Francis Geraci
Comment by crazybleedingheart Friday, Feb 22, 19 @ 7:14 am
Are those ads still on the air? I had to leave Illinois because of the sky-high state property tax.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Friday, Feb 22, 19 @ 7:16 am