Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Here we go…
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* Diana Sroka Rickert, the Illinois Policy Institute staffer who recently urged the governor to fire all state employees, is now cheerleading for a state government shutdown…
If there is indeed a government shutdown, however large or small that is, that’s what taking on the Illinois political machine looks like. The long-term benefits of enacting Rauner’s reform agenda far outweigh any short-term impact of a temporary government shutdown.
Voters sent Rauner to Springfield to “shake things up.” If Illinois wants to break away from the downward spiral it’s on, “shutting things down” might be the price we need to pay.
* Rickert claims it’ll be no big deal either way…
When Minnesota state government shut down in 2011, as much as 80 percent of the government continued to operate. […]
If it happens in Illinois, the usual crew will be taken care of: Under state law, politicians, pensioners and government workers will still collect paychecks. No wonder Illinoisans are so jaded about state politics.
Minnesota missed its budget deadline by only 20 days. That’s nothing compared to what could happen here if the players engage in the full-blown war that Rickert so desires.
Also, state workers here won’t collect paychecks unless they get a judicial order. Come August, however, when the school aid payment doesn’t go out and schools announce they can’t afford to open their doors, you’re gonna hear some serious screaming.
* Kristen McQueary goes a bit overboard in her warning of what could happen with a possible AFSCME strike, but perhaps Ms. Rickert should read it anyway in the context of her own confident war-mongering…
You’ll start squawking when your elderly neighbor’s home care worker doesn’t show up or the state park reserved for your daughter’s wedding gets closed. If unionized workers in the secretary of state’s office honor their striking comrades in AFSCME, you’ll have second thoughts when your driver’s license expires or your teenager needs a driver’s permit.
You won’t have much patience for a strike when the Thompson Center closes or the state election board stops answering the phone or your kid’s university shuts down. You might reconsider Rauner’s tough stance with AFSCME when you can’t get your professional license renewed or your tax return processed.
And of course there are more serious consequences to a strike. How would it affect caseworkers at the Department of Children and Family Services who check on children suspected of being abused? What about severely disabled children and adults who rely on state-employed health care professionals? What about the essential providers — addiction centers and day care centers and juvenile homes — that can barely keep their doors open, waiting for reimbursement from the state? If the state shuts down, all bets are off.
There are no-strike clauses in state government, so there will be no sympathy strikes at the SoS. But those offices could very well shut down during a state budget impasse.
And the universities won’t be impacted by an AFSCME strike, either, and state support is only a small portion of their income, so I doubt any will close their doors anytime soon during a shutdown.
Still, the rest of it is mostly plausible, and not at all pleasant.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:20 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Here we go…
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
This: ==If there is indeed a government shutdown, however large or small that is, that’s what taking on the Illinois political machine looks like.==
Seems to pretty heavily contradict this:==If it happens in Illinois, the usual crew will be taken care of: Under state law, politicians, pensioners and government workers will still collect paychecks.==
There’s nothing substantive behind this, it’s just one more turf war with Madigan. Same as it ever was.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:25 pm
Smart, thoughtful piece from McQueary.
Comment by Juvenal Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:28 pm
It’s good that McQueary wants to avoid a shutdown and is trying to cool Rauner’s rhetoric. To that end she should encourage him to sign SB 1229 to allow for arbitration and avoid a lockout or strike.
Comment by Reality Check Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:32 pm
People and groups like IPI just want to watch the state burn under the belief they can help re-build it from the embers.
Comment by Just Me Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:33 pm
No strike talk with the Teamsters yet and I doubt there will be.
Comment by foster brooks Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:36 pm
All the bad things that will happen if the state shuts down are not a concern to the oligarchs of the Illinois Policy Institute. After all those bad things will happen to people they don’t care about…
Comment by Mouthy Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:37 pm
Since the AFSCME contract expires on June 30th what is to stop the Governor from just ignoring the union and operate state government just using the Personnel Code?
Everybody just goes to work as usual.
Comment by Cassiopeia Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:38 pm
=== what is to stop the Governor===
The contract itself.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:39 pm
She has an undergraduate degree in journalism — that is the full extent of her background. Take it for what it is worth…
Comment by ash Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:40 pm
…not to say journalism is a bad thing. She just lacks any real experience and her idea of journalism is spin.
Comment by ash Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:42 pm
Is @StatehouseChick saying Rauner would “own” these problems?
Asking for a friend…
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:43 pm
Both sides need to calm down.
IPI types need to shush and realize that a government shutdown - especially a total government shutdown - is not really good for anyone.
The Senate Dems need to stop tweeting things akin to “Oh, the humanity!” when the budget impasse may result in the possibility of not hiring more conservation officers.
As always, the middle ground seems the most reasonable.
Comment by Team Sleep Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:43 pm
Rickert can certainly put a cheery face on firing tens of thousands of citizens and shutting down state government. Tne Chicago Fire would have been an awesome weenie roast to her.
Since she’s at an alleged “think tank,” could she give us the benefit of her scholarship as to the Brignt Sunny Day that will emerge from her coveted chaos?
No “shake em up” buzz words or talking points. What are the actual “reforms” at this point, what are their intent, and what will be the tangible, measurable benefits that justify the hardship and risks of these radical measures of firings and shutdowns?
Or is she just trolling for contributions from the Usual Suspects?
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:44 pm
===After all those bad things will happen to people they don’t care about===
They are classic chickenhawks.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:45 pm
What’s WRONG with an undergraduate degree in Journalism?
Comment by Conusone Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:45 pm
=== what is to stop the Governor===
The contract itself.
And the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act as well.
Comment by tominchicago Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:45 pm
=== what is to stop the Governor===
The contract itself.
And the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act as well.
How does the contract prevent this from happening if he gives a horrible Final Best Offer that is unacceptable.
What part of Illinois labor law stops him from lowering everyones wages by say 50%?
I’m not being snarky I’d like to know this information but don’t know where to find it.
Comment by Kevin Highland Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:49 pm
Sorry, I guess this one might be a turf war with the unions, instead. Sure, haven’t seen that before!
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:51 pm
Loosely speaking, the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act provides a right of all government employees to collectively bargain the terms of their employment. In other words, the governor can’t unilaterally set wages etc.
Comment by tominchicago Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:52 pm
Regarding the universities, CSU has come close to missing payroll a few times due to the state being behind in making payments. It is not unreasonable to think that stopping payments from the state would impact the payroll in a very real way at CSU at least.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 1:55 pm
==just want to watch the state burn under the belief they can help re-build it from the embers.==
I have to say it’s not the worst idea.
Comment by Ra's al Ghul Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:00 pm
== CSU has come close to missing payroll a few times due to it being a corrupt, terribly run, money pit==
Fixed it for you.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:00 pm
=== No strike talk yet with the Teamsters and I doubt there will be’ ===
Do the Teamsters think their state workers will be spared from the loss of benefits and protections the gov has proposed taking away from their colleagues in AFSCME? If so, why?
Comment by anon Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:03 pm
==just want to watch the state burn under the belief they can help re-build it from the embers.==
Working great in Iraq! Another version of “we have to destroy it in order to save it.”
Comment by veritas Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:06 pm
From Wiki, what we have to look forward to if there is no budget:
The Minnesota State Lottery did not sell tickets during the shutdown, which meant the state could have lost about $1.25 million in revenue daily. Minnesota stopped selling tax stamps for cigarettes, which must be affixed to each pack before sale. The Star Tribune reported that cigarette sales would come to a halt by mid-August if no more tax stamps were issued. The state also stopped issuing liquor purchasing cards, which businesses need in order to purchase liquor from wholesalers. Many stores, bars, and restaurants renewed their liquor purchasing cards before the shutdown. However, the purchasing cards for approximately three hundred establishments expired on the first day of the shutdown, July 1. Liquor purchasing cards would have continued to expire on the first day of each month. Alcohol brand licenses expired, so MillerCoors lost their license to sell 39 brands of beer in Minnesota, and had to have them removed from shelves.
Comment by Juvenal Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:06 pm
When a contract expires, the terms of that contract are no longer binding. Generally, it is a mutual agreement by both parties to continue under the terms of the old contract while bargaining, but they are not bound to do so.
The termination clause in AFSCME’s contact says:
“This Agreement shall be effective July 1, 2012,
and shall continue in full force and effect until
midnight June 30, 2015, and thereafter from year to year, unless not more than 180 days, but not less than 60 days prior to June 30, 2015, or any subsequent June 30, either party gives written notice to the other of its intention to amend or terminate this Agreement.”
I guess a question is… has that 60 day notice been given?
Comment by birds Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:09 pm
Conusone –
Nothing wrong with a J degree that a good, grizzled editor can’t cure. Just like a house, a good foundation needs solid walls and a decent roof. Ms. Rickert’s got nothing up top.
Comment by Wallinger Dickus Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:21 pm
birds @ 2:09
I notice has not been tendered. Under that scenario, the current terms (including work hours, wages, etc.) remain in effect until a strike or lockout occurs after proper notice is filed by either party. Correct me if you know different but that is my understanding of the law as it applies to collective bargaining in Illinois.
Comment by Stones Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:25 pm
Here’s what the NY Times reported: “And so, on the eve of a holiday weekend, residents were likely to find the state’s parks, historical sites and the Minnesota Zoo closed, hunting and fishing licenses no longer being issued, and that state’s lottery system and racetracks unavailable. Minnesota’s 84 major rest areas along highways were closed…”
Does that paint a rosy picture of your 4th of July holiday? I guess it depends on which “80% of government” continues to operate doesn’t it?
Comment by workerbee Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:31 pm
Stones, I think you’re correct, but I wonder if a standard demand to bargain would be considered an “intention to amend” the agreement? I would think so.
Comment by birds Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:33 pm
No government too small, for the brains at IPI.
Comment by walker Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:38 pm
Word, well said. As you referenced, I couldn’t help but laugh at this line from Rickert:
“The long-term benefits of enacting Rauner’s reform agenda far outweigh any short-term impact of a temporary government shutdown.”
She has no clue as to what are those long-term benefits.
Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:39 pm
Some of the people at the IPI are nihilists. They don’t care about consequences as long as they get their way. And what do they want, Kansas? Kansas, with it’s IPI-style government, is crashing.
I credit the unions and Illinois Democrats for stopping a version of Kansas in Illinois, so far under the Rauner administration. That’s what Rauner would have got with a Republican state legislature.
Unions are trying to prevent chaos with the anti-strike bill. Republican union members should pressure their legislators to stand up for them and override a veto, if it comes to that. Maybe some votes can be had to push the numbers into a supermajority.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:39 pm
Now that 50% of the Medicaid population has been forced to go the (barely) Managed Care route will the plans (and the downstream providers) get paid?
I say cut them off and let the squawking begin. It’ll be over by July 4th (after the fireworks of course) No snark intended
Comment by BIG R. Ph. Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:45 pm
“Where a collective bargaining agreement is terminated, or continues in effect beyond its scheduled expiration date pending the negotiation of a successor agreement or the resolution of an impasse under Section 14, the employer shall continue to honor and abide by any dues deduction or fair share clause contained therein until a new agreement is reached including dues deduction or a fair share clause.”
- 5 ILCS 315/ Illinois Public Labor Relations Act.
Comment by AC Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:49 pm
Sometimes I think SOME non-state employees are all for a government shutdown or just don’t really care much about it one way or the other. However, things could get ugly really quickly in the Springfield economy if 15,000+ decently paid Sangamon Co. residents all of the sudden have no cash flow. Give it a few weeks, and I bet the car dealers and local realtors start caring about their customers pretty quickly.
Comment by moby Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 2:55 pm
She’s not helping at all.
Comment by A guy Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 3:04 pm
I’m wondering if today’s NJ Supreme Court ruling holding there is no constitutional right to government pension plan funding has any application to the Illinois situation. I suspect that the legal eagles on both sides of the GA aisle are pouring over it as we speak.
Comment by Cook County Commoner Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 3:05 pm
The Twitter feed from the ILGOP this afternoon is as shrill as the stuff that’s coming from Rickert.
Seriously — Trover et al. needs a squelch control. Rickert’s job is not to help anything — I realize that. She’s a hack. But the heightened — and heightening — talk from side of the aisle is sending the neighborhood dogs into a frenzy.
Comment by Frenchie Mendoza Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 3:07 pm
The economic impacts would be much greater than she can imagine.
“On average, the Illinois Department of Agriculure issues 6,100 Phytosanitary Certificates for exports valued at nearly 4 billion dollars from the State of Illinois each year. Examples of plant and plant products exported are corn seed, corn meal, corn grits, popcorn, soybeans, sunflower seed, flower and vegetable seed, onion sets, orchids, ornamental nursery stock, and greenhouse plants, just to name a few.”
What will Rauner say when ADM calls?
Comment by very old soil Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 3:12 pm
CCC, I believe the Illinois Supremes have said we’re not going to tell you how to fund it, but you absolutely have to pay it.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 3:17 pm
“How does the contract prevent this from happening if he gives a horrible Final Best Offer that is unacceptable.
What part of Illinois labor law stops him from lowering everyones wages by say 50%?”
The Governor can only make a final offer once the two parties are at impasse. An impasse occurs when there is no further room for negotiation on either side. That is unlikely to be the case on July 1. Even after a contract expires, the terms of employment cannot be unilaterally changed by the Governor while negotiations continue. This would almost certainly be considered an unfair labor practice. Certain provisions of the existing contract would no longer apply, but current pay and benefits should be unaffected. The NLRB has a website which addresses some of these issues: http://nlrb.gov/rights-we-protect/employerunion-rights-and-obligations (Technically, this doesn’t apply to state employees since they aren’t covered by the NLRB, but the protections afforded by the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act largely mirror the NLRB rules.)
Comment by Pelonski Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 3:17 pm
Or when you can’t get a steak because there are no meat inspectors.
Comment by very old soil Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 3:17 pm
I’m wondering if today’s NJ Supreme Court ruling holding there is no constitutional right to government pension plan funding has any application to the Illinois situation.
See IFT v. Lindberg. The ISC has already ruled that there is no constitutional duty to provide adequate actuarial funding for the pensions, just a duty to pay the obligations when they are due. The ruling in IFT v. Lindberg has allowed pension payment skipping of all sorts in IL for several decades. Not sure what, if anything in the NJ case would be germane here.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 3:22 pm
What is it with this crew? Their ignorant, over-the-top rhetoric is offensive. Do they really think they are going to get their way by dripping with contempt for middle class government employees and private sector union members?
Comment by kimocat Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 3:52 pm
Kimocat, they might not get their way, but they will collect some powerful checks from misanthropes who go for that sort of thing.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 3:54 pm
The notice to terminate the contract is routine.
Comment by Peoria Guy Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 3:58 pm
The below PDF is interesting. The IL Supreme Court has already said:
“The court sustained the Governor’s vetoes and held that no
statutorily-mandated contractual relationship existed with
regard to funding. The court also observed that the
legislature could have easily enacted such a provision had it
chosen to do so. Furthermore, the court recognized that the
sponsors of section 5 of article XIII of the 1970
Constitution only intended to guarantee that pensioners
would receive the full amount of their pensions, and that the
framers never intended to place a constitutional restriction
on the Governor’s ability to reduce annual appropriations to
the pension systems. ” –From Page 4 of the below PDF.
http://cgfa.ilga.gov/upload/2008%20january%20handbook%20of%20illinois%20pension%20case%20law.pdf
Comment by Kevin Highland Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 4:15 pm
For what it’s worth, the lead negotiator made it clear a while back that they had submitted to terminate the contract on July 1st. It’s true that it’s mainly a formality, but they have done it.
Comment by Theo's Houseboy Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 4:24 pm
What’s WRONG with an undergraduate degree in Journalism?
Nothing if you are speaking on topics related to journalism. But stray outside that and you had better have some substance on what you are talking about or you can look like a fool.
Personally I think that Ms. Rickert is doing a pretty good job at that.
Comment by Federalist Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 4:37 pm
“What, I say what are ya saying Boy?” Union members state employee can go on strike if the pre-requisites are met.
Comment by Foghorn Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 4:39 pm
I looked at this woman’s bio — talk about flimsy! Mostly a series of pretty short term free lance writing gigs. She has never run anything — government or otherwise and has no relative experience or education. But she does have a V.P. on her door at the IPI, so she must be brilliant? What a shill.
Comment by kimocat Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 4:42 pm
I have read the press releases on the NJ decision and I am still not certain how this is being interpreted as to applying to those those already retired.
If the NJ SC is of the opinion that they can cut those already retired they have not read the federal constitution which makes it very clear that states must honor their contracts. And this certainly is a contract even under most conservative view of any legal reasoning.
Comment by Federalist Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 4:44 pm
There are a number of journalists who turned into excellent political operatives and government managers.
Many of my journalism classes and most of my poli sci classes taught analytical thinking. Unfortunately some students like Rickert didn’t pick that up.
Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 4:49 pm
Haven’t had time to read the lengthy opinion yet but the syllabus suggests that the ruling is consistent with some of those from the Illinois Supreme Court, i.e. that the courts won’t get involved in funding/appropriation questions but will enforce the right to be paid for the pension. From the NJ syllabus: “The Court also emphasizes that its analysis does not conflate the issue of the State’s obligation to pay pension benefits with the issue whether Chapter 78 legally binds the State annually to make the scheduled payments into the pension systems. The Court’s holding is, simply, that Chapter 78 cannot constitutionally create a legally binding, enforceable obligation on the State to annually appropriate funds as Chapter 78 purports to require. (pp. 53-61)”
Comment by anon Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 4:50 pm
Simply put Rauners ideas have always been…Tear it apart then rebuild. He DOES have the power to envoke a lock out. His claim will be….. State that unions have waged “war” against tax payers, to pit neighbor vs neighbor. Shakin Springfield Up-SSP
Comment by bluegrass boy Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 5:17 pm
Oh, I don’t know, it might be nice to give anarchy a try. Of course the IPI might have to find new jobs if there is no government to advise.
Comment by A Jack Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 5:27 pm
== I’m wondering if today’s NJ Supreme Court ruling holding there is no constitutional right to government pension plan funding has any application to the Illinois situation. ==
Adding to what - wordslinger -, - Six Degrees of Separation - and - Kevin Highland - said …
Nothing really new that I can see at the moment (subject to more reading). The 2011 NJ law that supposedly required their General Assembly to make a specific level of payments was found invalid due to it’s (attempted) obligation of future GA’s to make those fixed payments being in conflict with a different NJ law preventing the future obligation of funds.
‘… the 2011 pension law “does not create a legally enforceable contract that is entitled to constitutional protection. The Debt Limitation Clause of the State Constitution interdicts the creation, in this manner, of a legally binding enforceable contract compelling multi-year financial payments in the sizable amounts called for by the statute.”’
The key words seem to be “in this manner”. Apparently there is a legal way to do so or they couldn’t issue things like bonds that require multi-year repayments.
As others have noted, the IL SC has said the same thing multiple times, starting with IFT v Lindberg in 1975.
Going to be spending some time reading it in detail tonight.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 5:44 pm
Seems like a lose lose scenario…
Comment by burbanite Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 5:45 pm
== But she does have a V.P. on her door at the IPI ==
Probably carries the same amount of weight as VP at your local bank branch. There the only one with any power is the Executive VP.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 5:47 pm
It is not true that state funds constitute a small portion of university budgets. Look at EIU and WIU’s budgets as examples. Lack of state funds to these schools would be devestating after a couple of months. They’ve got summer tuition now. But no state funds come August or, at the latest, September, things would start grinding to a halt.
Comment by Not My Real Name Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 6:05 pm
Fed, I don’t think the NJSC got into the issue of benefits at all. They focused on funding from what I have read so far.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 6:12 pm
Why again is this amazingly partisan person continuously quoted here? Just because the equally partisan Tribune printed her latest diatribe? I especially love her twitter handle “friend of the little person”. That must be snark.
Comment by The_Equalizer Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 6:32 pm
TE, IPI is tight with the governor. He gave them a boatload of money when he was running and he put tneir peeps on the state payroll.
IPI, in turn, pledged $10K to his inauguration bash, which is a weird thing for a non-profit, non-partisan “think tank” that doesn’t lobby to do.
But they’re a little different, all the way around.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 6:37 pm
How would Diana Sroka Rickert feel if we said that she should get fired and that she is over paid?
She is a very bad person.
Anybody who doesn’t care about people’s livelihood and just takes pot shots at people like her are not good people.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 7:06 pm
Like she does
Not like her
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 7:06 pm
She’s overpaid. Doesn’t deserve her pay OR any retirement. Apparently, as things are going, no one does. Everyone’s undeserving.
Comment by AnonymousOne Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 8:36 pm
- AnonymousOne - Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 8:36 pm:
She’s overpaid. Doesn’t deserve her pay OR any retirement. Apparently, as things are going, no one does. Everyone’s undeserving.
It is sad the way the world is going.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 8:45 pm
The difference between the New Jersey case and prior Illinois Supreme Court decisions is that it holds that the government may not agree to a funding scheme (not forced by another party). No application to SB1, but an agreement to fund is the cornerstone of the pension plans argued by Rahm and Preckwinkle to be completely different from SB1.
Comment by Cold Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 9:16 pm
@
- A Jack - Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 5:27 pm:
Oh, I don’t know, it might be nice to give anarchy a try. Of course the IPI might have to find new jobs if there is no government to advise.
This is snark, right? Just wanted to make sure.
Comment by Lynn S, Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 11:36 pm