Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Out of date and out of touch
Next Post: The ties that bind
Posted in:
* I was chatting with a suburban Democratic legislator yesterday who asked if I’d seen the new Crain’s Chicaog Business op-ed by Gov. Bruce Rauner. I was on the road, so I said I hadn’t gotten to it yet. To her eyes, she said, Rauner hit just the right notes and came off sounding almost liberal.
This has been a long, grueling campaign cycle, both nationally and locally. Now that the election is over, we have the opportunity to put the past behind us, come together and focus on the future.
The people of Illinois deserve prompt bipartisan action to solve problems and get good things done—to make Illinois more competitive so we can be more compassionate, to enact truly balanced budgets along with reforms that grow our economy and protect taxpayers. By working together we can fundamentally improve the future for the people of Illinois through term limits, lower property taxes and more jobs.
Throughout the spring and early summer, our team worked vigorously with members of the General Assembly from both parties to reach a grand bargain. In order to ensure our schools remained open and state government operations continued, we worked out a bridge funding plan to get us past the election. While a short-term fix was not our preferred option—we wanted that grand bargain—in the spirit of compromise we accepted the commitment from Democratic leaders that we would negotiate a solution following the election. This election is in the past, and it’s now time to focus on the future together.
This week the Illinois General Assembly will return to the state Capitol for its annual veto session. This is our opportunity to come together and pass a balanced budget, which is why I have invited the four legislative leaders to meet and immediately begin negotiations on an agreement containing a balanced budget and reforms.
We must include reforms that the people of Illinois are calling for—economic reform to spur job growth, education reform to ensure that every child has access to a quality education, political reform to return power back to the people, property tax reform to give homeowners and business owners much needed relief, and pension reform to get our state’s financial footing back on the right track.
Illinois is on an unsustainable path, and simply raising taxes to attempt a balanced budget will not solve our long-term structural deficits. For decades our rate of economic growth has been low and our rate of government spending growth has been very high. We must increase our growth rate for jobs and lower spending in government. We should do that not by focusing primarily on cuts to human services, but by curbing the cost of our government bureaucracy.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:59 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Out of date and out of touch
Next Post: The ties that bind
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
So….. we’re supposed to pretend now that the governor hasn’t set pre-conditions for considering a budget?
That he hasn’t fulfilled his Constitutional duty to propose a balanced budget?
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:04 am
===This week the Illinois General Assembly will return to the state Capitol for its annual veto session. This is our opportunity to come together and pass a balanced budget, which is why I have invited the four legislative leaders to meet and immediately begin negotiations on an agreement containing a balanced budget and reforms.===
Linking reforms as budgetary requirements will lead to neither reforms or a budget.
Rauner wants a budget, Rauner should propose one.
Rauner wants it balanced, Rauner needs to propose $9 billion in cuts.
No $9 billion in cuts, then revenue isn’t a “give” it’s an undisputed required element.
Undisputed require elements can’t be held hostage for wants like, you guessed it, “reforms” which are NOT budgetary elements described in any accounting principles.
So, while sounding “liberal”, it’s really the same lyrics to a different tune, with sweeter sounding notes to lyrics already dismissed.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:05 am
Nice piece Rich….wait until MM has to negoiate with BR over the map in 2020 and then we can push all those Chi Dems back into the city and get about 3 or 4 more con seats….etc
Comment by scott aster Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:08 am
=== I was chatting with a suburban Democratic legislator yesterday===
Gents, this conversation was not with some hard core GOP bomb thrower. There needs to be some movement and people will assign blame. The Speaker lost more than 4 House Seats and 2 Senate seats, he lost some serious leverage with his own members.
He’s a brilliant guy. He’ll figure it out. Not showing up at a leader’s meeting is auspicious to say the least. Maybe he’s buying time? There isn’t much for sale. He needs to win back about 20% of his caucus in a hurry. He’s in trouble. Again….remind yourselves who RM was talking to here.
Comment by A guy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:18 am
Propose a budget Bruce. Enough talk.
Comment by The_Equalizer Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:19 am
Show up at a meeting Mike. It’s your job. Enough talk.
Comment by A guy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:23 am
OW - I agree with your sentiments on reforms not being budgetary element. Pretty simple. GFOA and all.
But reforms do affect the budget. And if the technical argument you make is really the only argument out there against doing them along WITH the budget, I hope people will eventually take things into their own hands and vote accordingly.
There is no reason not to address reforms that could significantly affect the budget…while you do the budget. It is done all the time by businesses, families, and yes, government entities.
In my opinion the argument can’t even qualify as weak.
Comment by allknowingmasterofracoondom Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:25 am
Rauner can pen an op-ed piece but he can’t have a stagger make up an agenda for a meeting with the 4 tops? Real meetings where things get done have agendas. Otherwise, they are just chats or photo ops. Maybe Rauner doesn’t want the public to know his “agenda”.
Comment by Simple Simon Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:27 am
- allknowingmasterofracoondom -
The undisputed math for Rauner’s Reforns are 1.4%, $500+ million… for a budget of $36 billion plus.
Rauner is holding the budget hostage.
Keep up.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:28 am
So how do you ever get an agreement without meeting? John Bradley got thumped in his race by an unknown. Simon got the same. It appears people are tired of the same old faces telling them the same old lies.
Comment by Nieva Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:28 am
Even with the loss of seats — and Rauner’s favorite ’super-majority’ talking point — the GOP is — and will remain for some time now a *minority* in Illinois.
We’re a blue state — the blue state — in a sea of red.
Rauner, Radogno, Durkin — they all want to pretend like Trump’s win — despite Clinton taking 2 million *more* of the popular vote — is some kind of mandate. As if, yeah, we’re still a minority, but see, now you have to talk with us.
The majority remains a majority. Rauner should propose a budget. The majority — along with the GOP minority — will discuss it.
Why is this difficult?
Oh, wait — I know. It’s difficult because Rauner wants to pretend the GOP is the majority — and can dictate the terms. Now, how messed up is that?
Comment by Bobby Catalpa Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:29 am
I agree about the “liberal” sounding tone.
Rauner (along with the Clintons) is part of the new elitists center, a group of pro-business moderates and think-tank liberal globalists. They don’t have a home in Trump’s GOP or the Sanders/Warren Democratic Party.
Comment by Roman Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:29 am
- A Guy -
Who was Rich talking to? Do you know?
You seem to know, you may know, but do you?
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:30 am
And the 4 tops can’t meet with him without an agenda?
Comment by oneman Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:33 am
==I was chatting with a suburban Democratic legislator yesterday ===
That’s who. Does it matter greatly which one it was?
It was not a party-line. I don’t know. I know what he wrote. Do you think he just casually tossed that line in there? There’s unrest in the Dem House caucus. I know you know that’s true.
Comment by A guy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:35 am
Illinois hasn’t had a balanced budget in 20 years, why start now? I’m surprised Rauner didn’t just give up already on trying to enact any reforms and just pass a budget that has a big hole in it. All his predecessors did, why not him? Makes budgeting easy when you don’t have to balance any numbers. Then everyone can have the budget they want and we can all pretend the problem is solved.
Comment by Maximus Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:36 am
OW - with respect - I know about 1.4%. Estimates and opinions are terrific. Some are accurate, some are not. I have filing cabinets of them collecting dust. The pollsters have some in their files as well.
Reforms suggested don’t just affect the State budget - they can drastically reduce local government costs as well, and spur at least the IDEA that Illinois cares about the economic condition of the state.
We need new revenue and reforms. The argument against reforms is getting stale. If there is no compromise, I believe there will be a voting revolt in this state.
Comment by allknowingmasterofracoondom Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:41 am
–Show up at a meeting Mike. It’s your job. Enough talk.–
Enough talk is right. Speaking of jobs….
Article VIII. SECTION 2. STATE FINANCE
(a) The Governor shall prepare and submit to the General
Assembly, at a time prescribed by law, a State budget for the
ensuing fiscal year. The budget shall set forth the estimated
balance of funds available for appropriation at the beginning
of the fiscal year, the estimated receipts, and a plan for
expenditures and obligations during the fiscal year of every
department, authority, public corporation and quasi-public
corporation of the State, every State college and university,
and every other public agency created by the State, but not
of units of local government or school districts. The budget
shall also set forth the indebtedness and contingent
liabilities of the State and such other information as may be
required by law. Proposed expenditures shall not exceed funds
estimated.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:42 am
===Does it matter greatly which one it was?===
Yet, - A Guy -… it matters that you made it such THE point…
===Gents, this conversation was not with some hard core GOP bomb thrower==
Hmm… This?
=== I don’t know. I know what he wrote. Do you think he just casually tossed that line in there===
Do you even know your point now?
Maybe a walk, paint, sculp… a nap might help.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:51 am
To all of Bruce’s defenders: Where’s the proposed balanced budget???
Comment by Illinois O'Malley Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:52 am
===Reforms suggested don’t just affect the State budget - they can drastically reduce local government costs as well, and spur at least the IDEA that Illinois cares about the economic condition of the state.===
What are those numbers. Specifically?
“No, that’s ok, I’ll wait for your numbers, thanks.. “
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:53 am
==And the 4 tops can’t meet with him without an agenda?==
There’s no point in meeting if the Governor is going to make it a discussion about passing his Turnaround Agenda.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:55 am
Oneman: an agenda means you respect the other person’s time. An agenda allows input by all on the meeting topics. An agenda means you plan on getting things done.
Comment by Simple Simon Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:56 am
==There is no reason not to address reforms that could significantly affect the budget==
Neither term limits nor redistricting reform have anything to do with the budget
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:56 am
Given the history of these meetings, I would not show up without an agenda. Otherwise it is a photo ops of the Gov lecturing everyone, not any real meeting of minds.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:58 am
Rauner, Radogno, Durkin — they all want to pretend like Trump’s win — despite Clinton taking 2 million *more* of the popular vote — is some kind of mandate. As if, yeah, we’re still a minority, but see, now you have to talk with us.
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=2016+popular+vote+results&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8#eob=enn/p//0/1///////////
The difference is less than 700,000 votes Bobby not 2 million.
You can’t just win huge majorities in California, New York and Illinois and claim the Presidency.
There are 47 other states that need to weigh in.
For the most part, Trump chose not to campaign in Illinois, New York and California, effectively writing them off. If the popular vote was all that mattered, they would campaign in these huge blue states and certainly narrow the gap.
I think you have it backward, Madigan is the only one saying he does not have to talk to the Governor.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:02 am
Why do we need a meeting? The Gov can have a balanced budget any time he wants. He just needs to propose one. He can have a vote on any TA item he wants. He just needs to have it introduced. Mr Slings and Arrows knows the general public will support none of it if they see the light of day before passing. That is why he needs a back room deal, not open votes.
Comment by Simple Simon Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:05 am
===an agenda means you respect the other person’s time===
I’m told there is an agenda.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:07 am
To all reds vs blues stop it. This election was about fear; Lost of jobs, in an ecocnomy where those jobs are not coming back and when they don’t the nation /state goes in another direction. A true balanced budget with all that entails increased taxes social services and education. Without it an oped is simply recyclable paper.
Comment by Ex Spsa Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:09 am
Rich: that’s good to hear. Madigan’s Sunday statement suggested otherwise. Was he misleading or did agenda come later?
Comment by Simple Simon Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:13 am
=== by curbing the costs of our government burocracy ===
There he goes again, scapegoating state workers, despite the fact that Illinois has one of the smallest state burocracies per capita of any state.
Comment by anon Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:18 am
Does the agenda include a balanced budget?
Comment by Illinois O'Malley Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:21 am
=== There is no reason not to address reforms that could significantly affect the budget…while you do the budget. ===
Pray tell, how do term limits and redistricting reform “significantly affect the budget”???
Comment by anon Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:23 am
Rauner’s continuing to publicly press Madigan, and far more importantly, define Madigan … as an obstructionist and only concerned about maintaining his power as Speaker.
Madigan’s perceived power is in jeopardy and he’s got to do something …or he’s going to lose his caucus.
Comment by Deft Wing Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:28 am
===Madigan’s perceived power is in jeopardy and he’s got to do something …or he’s going to lose his caucus.===
Unless there are 7-10 Democrats willing to usurp Labor’s collective bargaining and prevailing wage, Madigan isn’t Rauner’s problem, it’s that Rauner doesn’t have 60.
If Madigan were to leave, are you saying the Turnaround Agenda gets passed? lol.
Rauner will now face the voters in 2018. There’s that too.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:31 am
Sling, we don’t disagree that the Governor should present an agenda.
Do you disagree that the Speaker’s job would include meeting with the Leaders? At the beginning of a Legislative Session?
Comment by A guy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:31 am
@Simple Simon
If he weren’t on your side, Oswego Willy would tell you to “keep up.”
All of the Turnaround Agenda items, and then some, have been introduced in bill form. They’re sitting in House Rules, where they will likely ever remain.
Oh. And his budget proposal was introduced on time. It’s been available online for almost a year.
“Please keep up.”
Comment by Jack Kemp Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:54 am
–Sling, we don’t disagree that the Governor should present an agenda.–
LOL, I didn’t say anything about “agenda.” I’ll speak for myself. I pointed out the Constitution requires the governor to present a balanced budget.
–Do you disagree that the Speaker’s job would include meeting with the Leaders? At the beginning of a Legislative Session?–
Sure. And I’m sure they will, as they have before. So what?
But it’s ridiculous to pretend that meeting dates are the reason why there is no budget. The governor has never drafted one, as he’s explicitly charged with doing, and he has maintained he will not engage on a real one until certain non-budget pre-conditions are met.
Did you miss the last nearly two years?
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:57 am
- Jack Kemp -
I explained, clearly, Rauner’s framework is there, and it’s dramatically underfunded by billions.
Rauner tried with his framework to then “allow” for revenue, (revenue that is 100% required) for Turnaround Agenda items passed.
Can you read, or… lol
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:01 am
“There’s unrest in the Dem House caucus.”
This has been promised on these comment threads since Day 1 of the Rauner Administration, but here we remain. I am not sure that a single legislator’s way of mocking the Governor’s op-ed signals that Lucy is really going to hold the football in place this time.
Comment by Arsenal Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:06 am
Arsenal, there’s way more to this, but you gotta subscribe.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:08 am
PREDICTION - the next Democratic candidate for Illinois Governor will, during the campaign, announce that he will instruct members of the Democratic Caucus to support someone other than Mike Madigan for Speaker. IF that person wins, having defeated a $200 Million onslaught, he or she will be the undisputed leader of the Democratic Party in Illinois (a la Rauner now with the GOP) and Caucus members (assuming they keep their majority) will support the new Governor’s candidate for Speaker NOT Mike Madigan.
Frankly, it’s something Quinn should have done after beating Brady.
Comment by Grand Avenue Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:36 am
Without the cover of a victorious Democratic Governor, Caucus members will unanimously back Madigan because they don’t want to get kicked off of every committee (not to mention getting Ken Dunkin’ed)
Comment by Grand Avenue Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:44 am
Grand Avenue: Fun fantasy. You left out the part of having to self-fund to the tune of tens of millions, to wrest the nomination from the regulars, like Rauner did.
Comment by walker Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 12:16 pm
“But by curbing the cost of our bureaucracy”. There it is. The destruction of AFSCME and consequently the suffering of 100’s of thousands whose insurance is pegged to ours is what he’s going to do. In reality it’s going to collapse the state workforce. Make all the grand bargains you want. Doesn’t mean a thing if you don’t have workers to make your state government function. Fact: smallest state workforce per capita in the U.S. BEFORE Rauner. Don’t say I didn’t warn you. Superstars are about to learn how far they get without union employees. For a preview simply look at how DCEO has functioned and is functioning. Answer it isn’t.
Comment by Honeybear Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 12:40 pm
The unrest in the Houde Dem caucus is palpable … and for good reason.
Comment by Deft Wing Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 12:46 pm
==The unrest in the Houde Dem caucus is palpable … and for good reason.==
Did you meet with them today, Deft Wing? Have you talked with several of them over the past two weeks? Are you on Democratic staff?
Or are you just a political hack, paid to put out that message?
Sorry, but you’ve said the same thing at least a dozen times, in the past two weeks. Yet, while I hear some political concerns and speculation in my discussions with Dem House members, I don’t hear anything like the levels you’ve been reporting.
Comment by walker Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 12:57 pm
Essays like this are nicely-nice window dressing.
“Reforms” means impasse, deadlock, name calling.
It is cover for RAUNER to blame dems for damage and starving the beast. In his mind, RAUNER wins either way.
Pretty soon more hostages will die off.
Comment by Langhorne Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 1:51 pm
===But it’s ridiculous to pretend that meeting dates are the reason why there is no budget.===
It’s not ridiculous at all. If you’re not meeting, the chances of creating a passable budget are next to nil. Correction; they are nil.
Comment by A guy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 2:35 pm
“Arsenal, there’s way more to this, but you gotta subscribe.”
Well, I don’t got the scratch for that, so I’ll have to remain in the dark.
Comment by Arsenal Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 3:38 pm
Bruce you forgot the most important one WELFARE reform !
Comment by Frank Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 4:31 pm
A grueling national campaign that I was focused like a laser to cuts to social services and bonuses to the worthy…
Comment by Rabid Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 7:17 pm