Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Metra misses the point
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* Aaron Chambers had this observation about the governor’s pledge to veto $500 million in “pork” from the operating budget and try to implement almost $500 million in new health care programs…
Blagojevich reasserted his relevance in a big way. But when retribution comes, we may know the true meaning of “big.”
Yep.
* The Post-Dispatch looks at how the governor’s health care plan might fare in the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules…
Rep. David Miller, D-Dolton, a [JCAR] member, was hesitant to judge a plan he hadn’t seen but said it would likely face a tough audience at its committee hearing. He said that even if the three Senate Democrats supported it, the House Democrats would not be easy to convince.
“I know I’ve got some serious questions about it,” Miller said. “I would think a majority of members, facing these hurdles, would be opposed to it.”
Rep. John Fritchey, D-Chicago, another committee member, said the committee was “intended to help implement legislation and legislative policy, not to subvert it or act as a shadow legislature.”
Not mentioned, unfortunately, is that Fritchey is one of Blagojevich’s harshest critics and an avowed enemy. Miller was the sponsor of HB 750 - the income tax hike for schools and property tax relief - which the governor fought so hard against this spring. Miller and Fritchey are also legislative allies on most issues.
* The Tribune went back to the 2006 campaign archives to check on the governor’s latest flip-flop…
With the issue in limbo before voters went to the polls, Blagojevich spokeswoman Abby Ottenhoff said the governor would block any post-election efforts by lawmakers to give themselves a raise. She said he would use his line-item veto power to scuttle any such funding. […]
When asked why he retreated from his campaign opposition to pay raises, he provided a different take on the matter.
“I don’t know that I ever got asked that in the campaign,” he said.
The governor’s latest comment came as no surprise to Rep. Jack Franks (D-Woodstock), who voted against the raises.
“He does this all the time,” Franks said. “He’ll say anything and do the exact opposite. For him to do a complete flip-flop, I would say, it’s the only consistent thing he does.”
Yep, again.
* Carol Marin offers up an idea…
I propose a solution. Bring in Mayor Daley and Rep. J. Dennis Hastert for a bipartisan mediation of this mess.
Daley has been harping all summer that all lawmakers need to do is negotiate, negotiate, negotiate. Hastert, the former speaker of the U.S. House, announced that he’s retiring soon, so he clearly has some free time available. His experience as a wrestling coach can only help.
Send the two of them to Springfield to force Blagojevich and the leaders of the General Assembly to understand that only the strong survive.
Maybe then we’ll have peace in the valley.
Except, like any sane person, they wouldn’t go near the Statehouse with a two hundred-mile pole. Would you?
* More budget stuff, compiled by Paul…
* Rochester Supt. denounces denial of school funds as political charade
* Plan may revive funds for hospital; hospital assessment program chart
* State schools chief confronts budget challenges
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 7:49 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Metra misses the point
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Except, like any sane person, they wouldn’t go near the Statehouse with a two hundred-mile pole. Would you?
No, and why should they? Hastert in particular… the folks in Springfield need to sort it out themselves and let the voters judge the outcome come next election.
Comment by Bill Baar Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 8:06 am
The JCAR angle will be tricky. “We will not subvert the legislative process, even if it means over 500,000 get access to health care.” “These projects are not pork. This sewer is vital to this community. This program for gang members is clearly helping to stop crime. We cannot divert funds from this sewer, or this program to help gangbangers to health care for women and children who have no health care.” “This governor cannot be trusted. Therefore, we will not allow him to divert these funds from these important funds from the projects for which they were appropriated. Health care will have to wait until the general assembly is ready to act on those needs.”
Did I miss any arguments? Would you say these things publicly if you were a representative on JCAR?
Comment by Anon Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 8:22 am
Mayor Daley and Dennis Hastert as mediators. Two of the most, uh, ethically challenged pols in recent Illinois political history.
And Carol thinks they’d be negotiating on behalf of the taxpayer?
Comment by Cassandra Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 8:55 am
If we are to consider sanity in the equasion, does letting Mayor Daley nearer to the Sppringfield treasury make any sense?
Lets start by looking at the ratio of bond indebtednes in relation to EAV in Chicago as a start. How about an analysis of school revenues diverted by questionable TIFFs? I could go on foe some time before starting to catalog the management problems…..
Using Chicago’s math, we would make the state’s financial future even bleaker.
Comment by plutocrat03 Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 8:58 am
Rich,
I know that you and I have talked about this at length, but I want to address the issue of being called ‘one of Blagojevich’s harshest critics and an avowed enemy’.
I readily stand behind my criticisms; I was elected to be a voice for my constituents, and I try to do that. My comments have not been ratcheted up based on the recipient, I would have made the same comments based upon any Governor who has said or done the things that this one has.
To the extent that others feel that political concerns keep them from freely speaking their minds, that is obviously their decision to make. In reflection though, I cannot think of a criticism that I have made which is not readily defensible.
As for being an ‘avowed enemy’ of the Governor, those closest to the situation know that this isn’t the case either. On more than one occasion, I have attempted to reach some type of accord with the Governor in the interest of trying to get positive things done, only to have those efforts squarely rebuked. At a certain point, the attempts become wasted effort. I will continue to work toward getting things done. Spending energy being an avowed enemy of anybody simply doesn’t further that goal.
To take it a step further, I think that the sad truth is that he relishes the discord that exists between the two of us. This is a trait that has appeared on several different fronts during this administration, and one that I think serves nobody well.
I do not particularly enjoy being at odds with my predecessor, constituent, and Governor. But at the same time, I will not retreat from saying or doing what I believe is in the best interest of my constituents or the people of Illinois.
With respect to JCAR, as I told the Post-Dispatch, the committee is a deliberative one. I think that it is safe to say that each and every one of us supports access to quality and affordable health care. At the same time, the members of the committee are mindful of what our role should be, and should not be.
At the risk of channeling Bill Black, there is a process, that process is bigger than any one of us, and that process should be respected.
Comment by Rep. John Fritchey Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 9:09 am
I imagine the three senate dems will support the healthcare. Fritchey is obviously a no. Miller and Holbrook will face much scrutiny over this vote. Miller by african-american voters who are strongly in favor of healthcare and Holbrook from the metro east political machine.
This is an easy vote. A good Democratic issue.
Comment by El Salsa Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 9:10 am
El Salsa,
This will be my last comment here I think, I have a bunch to get done today.
I am far from ‘obviously a no.’ I am the son of a breast cancer survivor a husband, and a father to a beautiful daughter. As such, I am even more keenly attuned to an issue such as increased breast and cervical cancer screening than even my core Democratic beliefs would lead me to be on their own.
It is an easy vote only in terms of taking the easy way out. If one is to look at HOW this is being done, the decision is far from easy.
I repeatedly told the Post-Dispatch that I have ZERO opinion on the Governor’s plan right now because, like everybody else, I haven’t seen it.
When it is presented to us, we will all review it on its merits, in the context in which it is presented to us.
I hope that this clarifies the issue somewhat for you.
Comment by Rep. John Fritchey Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 9:20 am
As I see it , the only solution is court. The legislative bodies cannot allow the Gov. to do what ever he wants. The legislature and executive branches are on equal footing. The Gov. has no right to spend money on programs where the legislature has not funded the money. If the legislature allows the Gov. to proceed as expected, he will continue to do so in future years. The Gov. must be stopped now !
Comment by MOON Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 9:24 am
With regard to the Blagijevich flip flop on the pay raise questionn: He merely states that he does not remember being asked that in the campaign. So, I guess because he does not remember the question, his answer then does not count. Is this 1984 “new speak” trickery going to go unpunished?
Comment by one of the 35 Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 9:27 am
Let’s remember BlunderBoy’s brand of health care leaves most people unable to see docs
Rep. Fritchey has no need to bacl down. Miller is a very smart, trained medical professional who happens to be African American so don’t expect him toget bamboozled by El Salsa’s drivel.
While Rich is snoozing here is a little reporting from CA. wonder what vendors here are shelling out to pay for BlunderBoy’s Baloney?
LA TIMES:
Lenders tighten budget squeeze
Businesses in need of emergency cash are paying high rates for short-term loans or resorting to credit cards. The state doesn’t reimburse for that interest.
By Evan Halper
August 20, 2007
SACRAMENTO — By the time a state budget is passed, Janet Rios will be at least $4,000 poorer. That’s the 19% in interest Rios says she must pay on loans to keep her two nursing homes afloat until lawmakers can agree on a spending plan.
Rios would seem to be a welcome client for any bank. The state pays her to take care of the elderly, and once the budget impasse is broken she’ll get a bundle of money that has been delayed. She just needed emergency funds in the meantime to pay the Stockton homes’ bills.
The state offered to guarantee the money in a letter she could take to her bank, Wells Fargo. But “they said that is not an acceptable thing to base a loan on,” she said, and classified her as a high risk, with an interest rate to match on two $100,000 lines of credit.
The state won’t reimburse her for the interest. Still, she said, she had no choice but to take the bank’s terms. “We have to take care of 15 residents in wheelchairs. We have people getting fed through tubes in their stomachs. Some have seizures. Some need oxygen. There are a bunch of things we have to do. Nobody cuts us any slack.”
Wells Fargo declined to comment.
Scores of people who run nursing homes, medical clinics, day-care centers and other facilities complain of being gouged by lenders while they wait to receive their state payments. The fees quickly add up to thousands of dollars, and it will come out of their own pockets.
Late budgets happen almost every year in California. But while many hospitals, community colleges and other large institutions that rely on state money have prearranged credit to fall back on until state funding resumes, most state contractors have smaller facilities that must rely on local lenders.
This year’s budget impasse crept up on contractors. The umbrella organizations that represent them in Sacramento had signaled that a prolonged deadlock was unlikely, because the spending sought by Democrats was nearly identical to that proposed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
But in a surprise move, Senate Republicans refused to approve a spending plan until certain environmental regulations were rolled back. The standoff is now 50 days old.
Checks to contractors have stopped. Many say they received a frosty response from their bankers.
“Some of us have been able to teach our bankers over the years that this is a good loan,” said Ron Dodgen, the chief executive of Genesis Developmental Services, which serves 200 developmentally disabled Californians. “The risks are low. They are going to make money on interest, and in the end the budget will get passed.”
But most bankers have yet to reach that conclusion, Dodgen said. “They don’t understand this process,” he said.
That has left those in need of emergency cash paying steep rates for short-term loans, which under normal circumstances would be the cheapest kind of borrowing.
Maureen DeLeon, who operates homes for developmentally disabled children and adults in Chino and Cypress, said her situation has become so desperate that she has begun running a large chunk of her business on credit cards. The state owes her more than $40,000.
“I’m pulling off of credit cards to survive,” she said.
The cards, which typically come with high interest rates, are often an option of last resort for business owners when it comes to paying for staff and mortgages.
DeLeon is lucky; her credit cards from Bank of America cost less than 3% if she pays them off within a couple of months. But each allows her to charge only $15,000 — not enough to meet her needs.
She has maxed out the cards. A line of credit with an 11.99% interest rate has been used up as well. If a budget is not passed by next week, DeLeon said, she’ll be out of cash altogether. And possibly out of options.
“I’m going to have to rely on the bank to help me” with a larger loan, she said. “They know me, and I have been with them 30 years. But I can’t tell you if they will or not.”
Some nonprofits have tried to step in for state contractors, but their resources are limited.
NCB Capital Impact, an Oakland nonprofit that provides loans to “underserved” communities, has offered several health clinics loans with interest rates in the 6% range to make it through the impasse.
“It’s ridiculous that health centers get put into this mess so often,” said Jeff Brenner, chief financial officer at NCB. “Clinics found our role helpful since we have a familiarity with their revenue streams. We know how to verify with the state how much money the lender is owed. That gives us a good sense of what the borrowing capacity is.”
Medical providers such as Elizabeth Benson Forer, chief executive of the Venice Family Clinic, say NCB has been crucial in helping the business weather the financial tumult.
“They can be helpful and quick in turning around a loan for clinics in difficult situations,” Forer said.
But NCB has limited resources, Brenner said. The nonprofit has provided a few dozen bridge loans over the last several years. This month alone, hundreds of small businesses and nonprofits have sought such loans.
“There is only so much to go around,” Brenner said.
Lillibeth Navarro, who runs a support center in downtown Los Angeles for people with disabilities, knows that firsthand.
She already had a long-standing $45,000 line of credit from the nonprofit Local Development Corp. in Los Angeles and had no problem getting it to temporarily double that amount. But she needs at least an additional $100,000 to keep paying her staff and cover other expenses.
For that, she has turned to Bank of America, hoping the lender will extend a smaller line of credit she already had there at a 10.3% interest rate.
“We have been negotiating with them and have yet to find out their decision,” she said. “We are praying for that extension.”
Comment by GettingJonesed Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 9:45 am
The Blagojevich regime couldn’t handle the purchase
of flu vaccine properly. How would they handle
something as complex as a health care system?
Comment by Esteban Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 9:47 am
The state doesn’t have to run the expanded health care system, should it come to be.
People could be offered tax deductions commensurate with their income to make it more
economically feasible to purchase health insurance, with restrictions to ensure that
they purchase policies with standardized coverage (to avoid an upsurge in fly by night policies).
I agree the government is managing Medicaid poorly. We don’t need the added costs of even more massive state patronage bureaucracies managing our health care.
But that doesn’t mean that the huge sums we pay into the state (and federal) government shouldn’t come back to us in the form of subsidized health care. And tax incentives enabling us to purchase private insurance make it less likely that our system will continue its evolution towards a two-tiered system—the Medicaid/Medicare/Allkids etc
crowd vs. the upper middle class and wealthy
crowd among which, of course, must be included our feckless legislators and the guv.
Comment by Cassandra Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 10:00 am
I wonder how this collection of clowns hopes to impress the International Olympic Committee? Rooting for Rio, better beaches, better swimsuits.
Comment by Enemy of the State Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 10:00 am
Rich –
At the risk of being dundant or redundant, I commented last week (probably the last one of the day on a topic which was wiped out overnight) about a small hole in the Ilinois expected revenue caused by the fed actiuon to increase their cigarette tax.
Depending on which bill is passed by the feds and signed into law, it is estimated that the reduction in consumption will cause a $22 to $29 Million drop in Illinois state cigarette taxes. That means that just to stay even the Illinois tax need to increase.
I have seen no discussion of this either here or in the MSM, but some account must be taken.
Comment by Truthful James Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 10:00 am
Actually, Cassandra, it is my experience that the State manages Medicaid very well and very cheaply. When there are problems they are most often the result of policy decisions by policy makers not mismanagement.
Comment by steve schnorf Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 10:37 am
Rep. Fritchey makes a very important point regarding the governor: “To take it a step further, I think that the sad truth is that he relishes the discord that exists between the two of us.”
I lean toward the conservative side but I have a lot of respect and admiration for Rep. Fritchey. It must be incredibly frustrating to try to work out an issue with someone as an adult only to have that person act like a spoiled child.
Comment by PJ Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 11:23 am
Steve-
I think most Americans would disagree with you if you polled it. Medicare maybe, but not Medicaid.
It seems that Illinois Medicaid, for example, can’t even seem to pay its bills in a remotely timely manner. That’s mismanagement–whoever is responsible.
One of the biggest barriers to universal health insurance is Americans’ fear that if they support it, they will end up with a single payer system run by the government which they believe will result in shoddy care and lack of control. Like Medicaid.
And even if you are a Medicaid fan, you have to agree that increasingly, Medicaid and its associates Allkids and Family Care are not viable for Illinoisians who must use them yet cannot find a physician they feel comfortable with and who have great difficulty obtaining specialty care.
That’s why the solution is to enable people to buy private health insurance, not to expand the government system whether well run or not. Elites,including wealthy government elites, of course, don’t like this idea. They want to keep their expensive private health insurance all to themselves and let the rest of us scramble for care.
Blago’s current plan, though I support the concept, would likely add to the already large numbers of Family Care recipients doing that scrambling. They wouldn’t be doing that scrambling if they had been enabled, say, to buy a comprehensive BCBS policy with low deductibles.
Comment by Cassandra Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 11:29 am
Rich wiped out an earlier comment that praised Rep. Fritchey’s honest comments, Rep. Miller informed judgement and pointed out CA state vendors are having hard time geting lines of credit to operate during the budget battle there.
He must not have liked the fact I suggested he was snozin’
So sorry Capt.Sensitive!
Comment by GettingJonesed Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 11:50 am
The issue isn’t healthcare here. Anyone who says it is misses the point. The point is that the Governor is breaking the rules and running this state like a dictatorship. We let these rules break down here in Illinois and we’re no better than your average run of the mill Banana Republic.
Comment by Southern Illinois iPhone Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 12:08 pm
Daley has his own messes to clean up, Chicago Police Department, the Office of Professional Standards and the Citys’ Budget.
Daley doesn’t need to be dipping his nose into the states messes when he has his own to deal with in the city. Daley needs to speak about how the separation of OPS from CPD has thus far been successful, if it has been.
Leave Daley to deal with City issues and let the state take care of its own.
If anything, Mr. Ethical Obama should have some words to say about the state, but since he is too busy campaigning and Lord knows whose running his Senatorial Office and what accomplishments he has made in the U.S Senate, I am wasting my time as Carol would be wasting her’s writing about the same.
Comment by Carol Marin is wrong this time Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 12:21 pm
Cassandra,
You understand that Illinois’ Medicaid program could pay it’s bills very timely IF they had adequate funding. It’s never been a “management” issue at HFS. In fact, the Medicaid program is more likely to detect inappropriate healthcare billings than is Medicare because they’re motivated to save every dollar they can. They pay only 60-75% of provider costs, so as a program, they’re very cheap. In essence, the point made by Steve Schnorf is accurate…it’s the policy makers and their lack of financial support that have made Medicaid unattractive, not those who manage the program. That’s not a popular view, I’m sure, with someone who views state employees with such contempt, but I can assure you, there have been quite a few of those state workers at HFS who have been putting in long hours during this session.
Comment by Budget Watcher Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 12:57 pm
Is there any indication as to when the Budget Bill w/ amendatory vetoes will be forthcoming?
Comment by A Citizen Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 1:06 pm
I don’t think he’s sending the budget bill back with amendatory vetoes. So far in five months I’ve guessed wrong on Governor Flip Flop, this time I’ll just guess the exact opposite of what everyone is talking about. He’s trying to cut a deal to get Healthcare back on a Capitol Bill. There is no way he can rewrite law. If he does all Democrats in 08 really won’t be needed or re-elected would they.
Comment by Southern Right Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 1:24 pm
“I want to say this in a nice way, but that [salary increase] seems to be, among many legislators, the single biggest priority for them,” Blagojevich said. “And I … felt that if that’s so important to them, this is what really motivates their priorities, then maybe if I respect their priorities, maybe they’ll respect the priority I have, which is providing health care to families.”
Can this be construed as bribery?
Comment by Huh? Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 1:28 pm
At what point is the Perceptual Threshold crossed and the gov’s nonfeasance/malfeasance is recognized and acted upon? This state can’t proceed as a rudderless ship in a serious storm much longer without irreparable harm. The GA should at the minimum publicly rebuke his performance or pursue removal.
Comment by A Citizen Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 1:44 pm
Rich- do you know if the gov plans on vetoing any money from the constitutional officers’ budgets?
Comment by Curious Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 1:47 pm
The rumors I’m hearing are that the Governor will not veto any project that may benefit the district of any JCAR member.
Comment by Anon Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 2:16 pm
I have a question for Cassandra
You said
“People could be offered tax deductions commensurate with their income to make it more
economically feasible to purchase health insurance, with restrictions to ensure that
they purchase policies with standardized coverage (to avoid an upsurge in fly by night policies).”
Just how many of the people who need health insurance would benefit from Illinois state tax deductions? Do you plan to offer rebates to people who aren’t paying any state taxes?
Don’t get me wrong, health care is a major issue, but reducing state taxes won’t fix it.
The Governor is also wrong. We have seen enough in Washington with the decider subverting the constitution. We don’t need more of it in Illinois. Government here is bad enough already.
Comment by smh Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 2:25 pm
Rep. Fritchey’s comments regarding JCAR are spot-on accurate. The issue, from JCAR’s perspective, is NOT the merits of a health care expansion, it is the statutory authority to implement such a plan. In plain English, the legislature has not approved the plan, therefore the Governor does not have the statutory authority to implement one. The Illinois Administrative Procedures Act provides unambiguous authority on this process in case the Governor’s folks want to look it up.
JCAR members understand this and Rep. Fritchey did a great job articulating this distinction between voting on merits and fulfilling a sworn oath to uphold the constitution and the laws of the state (something the Governor apparently has trouble remembering).
Comment by former JCAR staff Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 3:13 pm
Correct me if I’m wrong, but as I recall, JCAR cannot really “stop” an agency from implementing rules. That would be a violation of the constitutional separation of powers doctrine. JCAR can “object” to the rules. IN a normal time, an agency would be verrrrrry reluctant to adopt rules that received an objection from JCAR. But with this Governor, these are far from normal times. Couldn’t his agency(ies) simply adopt the rules over JCAR’s objection? Ultimately, the courts will decide this, not JCAR.
Comment by blueinaredstate Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 5:00 pm
An agency can adopt “emergency” rules that go into effect immediately, but JCAR has the authority to suspend those rules. Typically, JCAR can object to a normal rulemaking process which is tantamount to a slap on the wrist and a promise to fix something in the future. However, in this case, I suspect JCAR would consider holding an emergency meeting to discuss the option of suspending any emergency rule the Governor may have the audacity to file with the Secretary of State’s Office.
There is a good summary of the JCAR process on its website (located under legislative support agencies on the www.ilga.gov webpage).
I would agree that any attempt by the Governor to adopt emergency rules would result in a legal attempt for an injunction, but such legal action would surely only reinforce the notion that mean republicans are trying to keep poor people from health care. It would play right into the Governor’s hands and then immediately out of his pie hole.
JCAR stands to be the best opportunity for common sense in this case. Let’s hope it doesn’t rise to this level of a constitutional crisis — which is exactly what would transpire if it did.
Comment by former JCAR staff Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 5:20 pm
Is it not possible for an aggreived party to obtain an injunctions against any spending in the entities and agencies affected by the shenanigans?
This would be, if it were possible, the doomsday option?
Comment by Truthful James Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 5:56 pm
It doesn’t have to be a tax deduction. It could be a tax credit or subsidy based on income. The point is, the people who are receiving the help would not have to take Medicaid, Family Care or such. They would be
financially enabled to go out and buy insurance on the market.
Comment by Cassandra Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 6:15 pm
To “blue in a red state”: JCAR can also issue “filing prohibitions” against non-emergency rules that, in its judgement, constitute a threat to the public interest or are contrary to statute in some way. An objection does not stop a rule from taking effect, but a filing prohibition does.
A filing prohibition remains in place until the agency either changes the rule, or JCAR or the full General Assembly vote to lift the prohibition. If neither of these corrective actions takes place within 180 days, the rule is permanently prohibited and can never be filed with the Secretary of State.
Filing prohibitions are relatively rare, but under the current administration have become more frequent. There have been at least 2 issued so far this year. Time was when JCAR could go several years without issuing a filing prohibition.
Organizations similar to JCAR exist in other states as well. The courts (in Illinois) have held that the JCAR review process does not violate the separation of powers; rather, it serves as a necessary check against the executive branch agencies going beyond the authority the legislative branch granted them in statute.
Emergency rules can only remain in effect for up to 150 days — normally long enough to complete the rulemaking process for a permanent rule if one is needed. JCAR can, however, suspend an emergency rule before the 150 days are up if the rule is deemed to be a threat to the public interest.
Comment by Lainer Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 7:32 pm
However, there is also the possibility that the Governor and the agencies in question would simply go ahead and try to implement their program without rules — as was done with regard to the stem cell research program. In a case like that, there is not much JCAR can do except try to push for legislation explicitly requiring the agency to do rules.
Comment by Lainer Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 7:42 pm
One last thing… which I discovered after poking around the internet for a while… prior to 2004, filing prohibitions could only remain in effect for 180 days unless the GA voted to extend them. For all practical purposes, this meant JCAR could only block rules temporarily. The law was changed in direct response to the current administration’s efforts to use the rulemaking process as an end run around the legislative process.
Comment by Lainer Monday, Aug 20, 07 @ 11:30 pm
PJ, I’m rarely with the Governor but I feel Fritchey has been acting the spoiled child and frequently. If he votes against healthcare it will be because he wasn’t able to exploit this Gov for his finacial gain. I am also tired of hearing that the Dems are the only reps that care about healthcare. Rep Coulson is but one fine exmaple of repub that has championed healthcare.
Comment by anon Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 6:58 am
Anon –
I doubt that Rep. Fritchey needs my defense, but a little civility is in order in naming him in what otherwise is a scurrilous comment.
About what “finacial (sic) gain” are you talking? Or are you merely a player in his Committeman race?
Comment by Truthful James Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 7:33 am