Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Reader comments closed for the weekend
Posted in:
* Senate President John Cullerton called on the Senate Republicans to put their budget proposals into bill form soon, saying his side of the aisle was preparing to do just that in early May. Cullerton said the Senate appropriations committees will be considering amendments and invited the Republicans to offer their own proposals, digging at them a bit for holding press conferences about their budget cuts without introducing any actual legislation. Ironically enough, he said all this during a planned media availability.
“We’re going to go to the Reference Bureau, not the Blue room… and we’re going to vote on bills,” Cullerton said, adding, “I think they proposed cuts in education of something like $750 million. So, go to the Reference Bureau and get their amendment to cut the education budget by $750 million and let’s debate it.” Watch…
* Cullerton also said he was “surprised and disappointed” that Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno wants to sit down over the next two weeks “to meet on an agreed-upon budget.” He said he’d meet with her, but he called it an “odd request,” considering that the committees will be considering legislation to deal with the budget.
“We will offer our amendments, we’ll urge them to vote for it. If they don’t think that we’re cutting enough, they can introduce their own amendments and then we can take votes on cutting some more.” Watch….
Videos courtesy of BlueRoomStream.com.
*** UPDATE 1 - 2:31 pm *** Senate Republican Leader Radogno will respond to Cullerton’s remarks in a few minutes. I’ll let you know what happened.
*** UPDATE 2 - 3:33 pm *** Senate GOP Leader Radogno responded to Cullerton…
Radogno said she was wary about offering up her amendments because she figures the amendments would die in committee and there would be no floor votes on her members’ ideas.
* Meanwhile, you probably already know that a Republican-backed worker’s compensation reform bill went down in defeat yesterday…
The Illinois Senate killed a bill late Thursday evening that would have dramatically overhauled the state’s workers’ compensation system – a system that all parties agree is rife with fraud and abuse. […]
[GOP Sen. Kyle McCarter’s] legislation, Senate Bill 1349, would have reduced the medical fee schedule for workers’ compensation procedures by 30 percent, given employers the right to choose an employee’s doctors and course of treatment for the first 60 days, adopted American Medical Association guidelines for determining impairment and required that the workplace be the primary cause of the injury – a principle known as causation.
Causation was the sticking point for Senate Republicans and the business community.
“If causation is not part of it (reform), it’s likely it will not be strong enough to make a difference,” Sen. David Luechtefeld, R-Okawville, said. […]
“I don’t want to pass a bill that will lead to more litigation, not less litigation – that’s not going to save anybody any money,” said Senate President John Cullerton, D-Chicago.
Most Democrats voted “Present.” The media take-aways is they did so to avoid being accused of voting against reform. Likely true, but it’s also a way to show that they’re not completely opposed to working with the Republicans. Sort of a legislative courtesy, I suppose you could say.
* More…
Among the stumbling blocks was disagreement over whether injured employees should be required to prove their injuries occurred at the workplace.
While GOP lawmakers argued it would crack down on fraud, Democrats said the clause would allow business owners to challenge claims and limit workers from collecting payments. […]
But Democrats and labor groups complained employees would lose the right to choose their own doctor. They said it also would prohibit many workers from receiving benefits.
Laborer’s International Union officials said the proposal would result in injured workers receiving less medical care and less money to live on while they recover.
Unions, trial lawyers and the docs were against it, so it went down. Not much of a surprise.
* Some audio from the debate…
* Sen. Mike Jacobs was the only Democrat to vote for the bill. His explanation…
…Adding… Greg Hinz has a new story up about a bill that I told subscribers of this morning…
Chicago-area officials say the bill could cost them hundreds of millions, and maybe billions, of dollars a year. But the measure involved, S.B. 2194, nonetheless passed its first test at midday Friday, clearing the Illinois Senate with three votes to spare and heading to an uncertain fate in the House.
Technically, all the bill, sponsored by Sens. Toi Hutchinson, D-Olympia Fields, and Dan Kotowski, D-Park Ridge, would do is force the Illinois Department of Revenue to collect sales taxes based on one and only one factor: the location at which the item is purchased.
But local officials including Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle, DuPage County Chairman Dan Cronin and, reportedly, Mayor Richard M. Daley are telling lawmakers that the bill would do far more, threatening their ability to provide services.
For instance, according to an analysis circulated by the Regional Transportation Authority, the bill would allow most any firm to set up a satellite office in a low- or no-tax county, and route all its orders there via computer, even if the item is delivered and used in a higher-tax area, like Chicago or Cook County.
* Related…
* Naperville leaders pleased with workers’ comp reform efforts
* Illinois Jobless Rate Drops To 8.8 Percent
* Senate Republicans unveil jobs proposals
* VIDEO: CapitolView 04/15/11
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 2:00 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Reader comments closed for the weekend
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
They are trying to save the state printing costs
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 2:05 pm
I would encourage the four tops to meet behind closed doors, craft a budget proposal that allows for borrowing to pay back the past due bills (aka refinancing) and to allow their members to debate it in open. You can craft an agreed bill behind closed doors and still have an open and transparent process. Maybe Senator Lightford should take on the budget as well.
Comment by Ahoy Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 2:15 pm
Ahoy, I disagree. Let’s see how this committee thing works. I’ve been doing this job for 21 years and have never seen it. Ever. Not once.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 2:17 pm
Also, if that process fails, then they can go behind closed doors to work it out. But I want them to at least give the open process a go. So, I couldn’t disagree with you more here.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 2:18 pm
Absolutely put it in bill form and work it out in committee.
The Four Tops method has been a crutch for the Mushrooms and who’s ever been in the minority forever, giving them maximum deniability for all tough decisions. It’s also been one of the biggest complaints of goo-goos of all stripes.
If you want to participate in governing, don’t hide your light under a bushel. Present competing ideas, debate them, hash them out in public and call the roll. That’s how it’s supposed to work.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 2:31 pm
That’s a good and fair point Rich.
Comment by Ahoy Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 2:32 pm
Yes, the R’s should put it in bill form so the D’s can vote Present. Good government in action!
Comment by Dwight Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 2:34 pm
LOL, Dwight. Zing!
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 2:40 pm
I don’t know the history behind the option of voting “present,” but I do know it’s practical effect.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 2:51 pm
How much courage does it take to vote present?
Comment by mokenavince Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 3:00 pm
Vince, a “present” vote is a “no” vote.
Whether someone spins it as an indication they’re willing to deal later, or use it as a tactic to fool others that they weren’t really opposed, when you add them all up, it’s the same as a “no” vote.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 3:07 pm
I love the out in the open approach. It will mark the decline of pubicly saying you are for something and then behind close doors doing the exact opposite and then blame the other party for the result. If you are for a cut or for an appropriation–prove it! No more games.
Comment by Time Keeps on Ticking, Ticking Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 3:08 pm
Wow. So Rodogno’s response is the equivalent of taking their ball and going home. She may be right, but at least then the GOP can say they tried to offer bills and amendments and they were rebuffed. This way they just look like obstructionists, which let’s face it, hasn’t worked too well for them so far.
Comment by Seriously??? Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 3:41 pm
–Radogno said she was wary about offering up her amendments because she figures the amendments would die in committee and there would be no floor votes on her members’ ideas.–
That’s quite possible in a democracy. It’s also quite possible to craft amendments to pick up votes from other members not of your party, or use them as a basis for a compromise.
The Senate GOP did a major service to the process by putting their own ideas out there for all to see. No time to stop now.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 3:46 pm
This is going fun watching them debate things like the DHS budget out in the open. The are going to be a lot groups taking note of who protects their slice of the pie who does not.
Comment by Give Me A Break Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 3:50 pm
I really not understand Radogno’s position on this. If the amendments are not proposed, then they will never be adopted. Call Cullerton’s bluff: propose them, and when they are killed in committee then take it public through the press. But not proposing them at all it accomplishes his goals more easily for him.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 3:58 pm
I really have never understood the argument that the minority party should offer up ideas/bills to solve the State’s problems. It always seemed to me is was just the majority party’s way of complaining for being forced to do their job right.
If people wanted the GOP to run the show, they would have voted for them. They didn’t, so the Democrats should suck it up and do the job and stop complaining about it.
Comment by Not It Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 4:05 pm
In unveiling her budget wish book, Radogno said she could put 15 members on her proposed cuts, but those 15 would vary from proposal to proposal. But now she doesn’t want to vote on it proposal by proposal.
So which is it?
Comment by piling on Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 4:19 pm
==If people wanted the GOP to run the show, they would have voted for them. They didn’t, so the Democrats should suck it up and do the job and stop complaining about it.==
That’s just a copout. The United States doesn’t operate as a Parliamentary democracy. Every elected member is a free agent who can work with whomever they want on anything. Party loyalty is a crutch.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 4:25 pm
“Radogno said she was wary about offering up her amendments because she figures the amendments would die in committee and there would be no floor votes on her members’ ideas.”
Well, that was good for a laugh. Oh, gosh.
Comment by MikeMacD Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 4:37 pm