Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar


Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives


Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Question of the day
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** In case you’re wondering about IR and EZ…

A look inside the belly of the beast

Posted in:

* From a blast e-mail from Rep. Jeanne Ives…

It seems that legislators are voting based on the title of a bill rather that what’s in the bill.

This week, SB 3234, a bill that passed unanimously in the Senate, received 42 NO votes in the Illinois House because the title on the electronic board said ‘Tire Fee.’

In actuality, the bill simply deleted a reference to an out of date fee, paid to the Department of Revenue, of $1 per new or used tire that is sold in the State in order to bring Statute up to date with the new fee of $2.50 per tire. That fee was changed 10 years ago and the Department of Revenue suggested the bill to clean-up inconsistency in the statute.

It was simple and necessary. A ‘No’ vote was either due to a lack of information or, perhaps, it was yet another game being played out in the People’s House on the People’s Time.

That’s actually a pretty strong insight into what appears to have happened. From the bill’s synopsis

Amends the Environmental Protection Act. Removes an obsolete reference concerning tire user fees.

Now, check out the roll call. Most politically targeted Democrats voted “No” as did most Republicans.

The Statehouse is often a Bizarro World unto itself.

…Adding… The bill’s sponsor just told me that he made it “abundantly clear” during debate that this was in no way a fee increase. Yet, HDem targets and most HGOPs still voted against it.

posted by Rich Miller
Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:13 pm

Comments

  1. As if Rep. Ives’s puppet masters at the Illinois Policy Institute, Americans for Prosperity, et. al., ad nauseum wouldn’t use a Yes vote to hammer an opponent.

    Comment by Reality Check Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:16 pm

  2. With the right “encouragement”, seasoning, self deprecating, and a willingness to learn more and teach less, Jeanne Ives could turn her image around.

    Let me know, representative…

    Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:18 pm

  3. Capitol Fax is worth reading. Ives’ email is…not.

    Comment by justsayin' Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:19 pm

  4. Was it really necessary? Where is the outcry and mass confusion over the alleged “inconsistency in the statute”? Why is Ives joining the tax raising liberals like Madigan? This outrageous tax and spend agenda is exactly what drove Bob to Arizona!

    Comment by Precinct Captain Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:20 pm

  5. ===worth reading. Ives’ email is…not. ===

    Sure it is. I read all her emails. And this one is hilariously spot on.

    Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:21 pm

  6. Heavens above.

    Ives actually has a point.

    And Springfield is in worse shape than I thought.

    Comment by Formerly Known As... Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:34 pm

  7. I had an alternative theory, based upon the sponsorship, until I realized that it wasn’t Ives or Drury but Zalewski who carried the bill.

    Comment by in the know Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:36 pm

  8. Reality Check is spot on. I can see the mail pieces now, Rep. Jane Doe voted to impose a fee on tires.

    Comment by Bill White Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:38 pm

  9. And yes, Jeanne Ives has a point; but the real culprits are the people who created this Bizarro World.

    Comment by Bill White Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:39 pm

  10. Fairly certain the kids in those “patriotism and representative government” classes the ILGA wants to make optional could have figured this one out and gotten things right.

    Can we put the kids in charge instead? Please?

    Comment by Formerly Known As... Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:43 pm

  11. Surprise! Some folks are not listening to the debate.

    Rep. A stated, “Darn, I can’t play Solitaire and hear the debate at the same time.”

    Rep. B admitted that his leadership instructions didn’t have any notes on this bill and he always defaults to “no.”

    Rep. C indicated that she just can’t stand the sponsor.

    Comment by Norseman Friday, May 23, 14 @ 1:04 pm

  12. This is definitely better from Rep. Ives - maybe she is starting to learn how to be a more effective member. She even has a chance of getting one of her bills passed.

    Comment by cover Friday, May 23, 14 @ 1:11 pm

  13. === Rep. Ives - maybe she is starting to learn how to be a more effective member. ===

    I’m going with the old saw about putting an infinite number of monkeys on an infinite number of typewriters, you’ll get one who’ll write prose.

    Comment by Norseman Friday, May 23, 14 @ 1:23 pm

  14. One of the highest legislative salaries in America, per diem, benefits, committee and leadership bonuses?

    Worth every penny.

    Comment by Formerly Known As... Friday, May 23, 14 @ 1:25 pm

  15. Is anyone really surprised by this. That is why your bills should be called “Puppy Dog Protection”

    Comment by Oneman Friday, May 23, 14 @ 1:56 pm

  16. It seems that legislators are voting based on the title of a bill rather that what’s in the bill.

    If you wish to influence people, don’t have your first sentence be an accusation that they are stupid.

    If you really wanted to be funny, make the joke about yourself.

    Comment by VanillaMan Friday, May 23, 14 @ 2:10 pm

  17. “As if Rep. Ives’s puppet masters at the Illinois Policy Institute, Americans for Prosperity, et. al., ad nauseum wouldn’t use a Yes vote to hammer an opponent.” - THANK YOU!

    Comment by horse w/ no name Friday, May 23, 14 @ 2:15 pm

  18. “Why is Ives joining the tax raising liberals like Madigan?” - Precinct Captain

    Not only that, why is she going with the environazis?!? This amends the Environmental Protection Act? Call Joe Walsh! Call the WLS emergency hotline! Gee, if I cant count on Jeanne I better move to Utah!

    Comment by low level Friday, May 23, 14 @ 2:47 pm

  19. It sure proves your statement about Franks, Rich. You’ve said Jack would never, ever vote for anything with a “fee” or “tax” in it!

    Comment by low level Friday, May 23, 14 @ 2:59 pm

  20. This is one fee that is questionable. A tire dealer told me he doesn’t pay for tire disposal. A company that makes other products out of old tires PAYS HIM. They leave a roll off dumpster for the old tires behind the store, when it is full, they pick it up and send him a check.
    Jeanne Ives, as a voter in your district, I would like to know exactly how much money has been collected from this fee and exactly where was it spent.

    Comment by DuPage Friday, May 23, 14 @ 4:03 pm

  21. Loved the Ives email!

    But why’d the sponsor put the word “Fee” in the bill title?

    Comment by Robert the Bruce Friday, May 23, 14 @ 4:06 pm

  22. Upon reflection, Tire Disposal Technical Correction Act would be a good name for a bill to make the 5% income tax permanent.

    Comment by Bill White Friday, May 23, 14 @ 5:06 pm

Add a comment

Sorry, comments are closed at this time.

Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Question of the day
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** In case you’re wondering about IR and EZ…


Last 10 posts:

more Posts (Archives)

WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.

powered by WordPress.