Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: “When you get 90 percent, declare victory”
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** IDOT to shut down road work on July 1 if no budget is passed
Posted in:
* Tribune…
Democrats led by House Speaker Michael Madigan contend that raising taxes is a necessity for closing a gaping budget hole, not a Democratic agenda item to be used as a bargaining chip.
“Who are they compromising with?” asked Madigan spokesman Steve Brown. He said House Democrats would “take a hard look at the proposal,” but also noted the chamber had already approved several pieces of legislation that he contended address Rauner’s requests. […]
Durkin said Republicans expect “substantial compliance” from Democrats, warning that he would reject “reform light or anything that is significantly diluted.”
Why should Madigan take the new Republican plan seriously? Democrats now need a three-fifths majority to pass a budget, Durkin said.
“The question is whether or not the speaker is committed to breaking the impasse, because he needs my votes,” Durkin said. “His members are frustrated. I talk to them. There’s pressure building up in the House Democratic caucus to get this to resolution.”
* SJ-R…
“There is pressure building up in the House Democratic caucus to bring this to resolution [said House Republican Leader Jim Durkin]. If he is committed to breaking the impasse, he needs to work with us.”
Because the General Assembly blew past its scheduled May 31 adjournment date without passing a budget, it now takes a three-fifths supermajority in the House and Senate to pass anything. Seventy-one votes are required in the House to pass a bill, with Democrats holding 67 seats.
Steve Brown, spokesman for House Speaker Madigan, D-Chicago, said none of the Republican proposals has been submitted yet as legislation.
“If and when they introduce bills or amendments, we’ll take a look at them and see what improvements, changes have been made, over what the House has acted on previously and what the Senate has acted on,” Brown said.
* Sun-Times…
“If he’s committed to breaking the budget impasse he needs to work with us, and work with me,” Durkin said of the speaker. “If he doesn’t talk to us nor work with us, to me it is just a reflection on his desire to do nothing and to make sure that the governor is the one who will be hurt next year in the gubernatorial campaign.” […]
Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said the package would be reviewed when filed, but noted that House Democrats had passed measures on similar “topics.” He also criticized the governor for moving the goal posts.
“Well, you know the governor has been known to take different positions at different hours of the day and night and different days of the week,” Brown said. “So, I guess we’ll have to see how they validate that.”
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:01 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: “When you get 90 percent, declare victory”
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** IDOT to shut down road work on July 1 if no budget is passed
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
===Durkin said Republicans expect “substantial compliance” from Democrats, warning that he would reject “reform light or anything that is significantly diluted.===
This is disappointing.
This is why Rauner undercut Leader Radogno, because she saw where compromise exists.
It appears others only see demands as compromising(?)
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:13 am
Budgets, with all kinds of non-budget related items attached, have been passed within hours of the legislation being filed before, but now that’s a problem for Madigan? He’s not wrong, but his previous actions make that argument less than credible.
Comment by Jeff Trigg Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:26 am
Can Democrats negotiate for something big, especially since the GOP demands are on the table, front and center?
Dems, shoot for the moon.
Ask for the progressive income tax language to be on the 2018 ballot. Ask for the new tax rate brackets. Ask for the windfall, generated in a few years, to be the big tax swap to remove schools from property taxes.
What do Dems want? Always seems they just want more of the same, which helps no one.
Comment by cdog Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:29 am
==Durkin said Republicans expect “substantial compliance” from Democrats==
So, presumably, amending the legislation so that a majority of Democrats could support it, wouldn’t be “compliant”. If the folks who voted for their democratic legislators wanted substantial compliance with the Raunerite agenda, they’d have elected Raunerites instead.
Comment by AC Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:29 am
I say put the Senate revenue bill to a vote in the House with the amendments Durkin suggested. Let’s see if there’s a bipartisan roll call with 71 votes — or close to it. That will have a clarifying effect.
Comment by Roman Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:29 am
The headline should read:
Leader Durkin holds budget hostage for non budget related items, Rauner’s way or no way.
Comment by How many months Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:32 am
===I say put the Senate revenue bill to a vote in the House with the amendments Durkin suggested.===
I’d ask Leader Durkin to file a bill containing the Senate’s tax hike language with Durkin’s sunset provision and language linking it to a property tax freeze. Then ask if any Democrats want to support the Durkin-Rauner tax bill. I bet they’ll find a lot of Democrats want to vote for that bill.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:35 am
“Seventy-one votes are required in the House to pass a bill, with Democrats holding 67 seats.”
Durkin doesn’t seem to realize that some of his caucus members are going to have to thrown under the trash can van Rauner is driving to get to 71. The Dems don’t have to go the full 67, especially if there are issues/bills they disagree with. We saw that during the budget “endgame” when only 42 would sign on. House and Senate Republicans are going to have to go on record, one way or another if a full budget is to be passed before the end of the month. Those with fortitude to stand against Rauner will have to have a “Kansas” rallying cry. And, as RNUG reminds us that keep forgetting, Rauner needs to be tied up in a lasso of truth MOU, otherwise he will double-cross his own owned party because nothing is always better for him than anything.
Comment by Anon221 Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:35 am
Or, to paraphrase Durkin’…
“Here, Dems, pass my bill. I can’t get enough of my members to vote for it.”
Comment by Winnin' Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:45 am
I’ll believe their sincerity when the put the Rauner-Durkin income tax increase bill on the board and the majority of the HGOPies vote for it.
Comment by Dance Band on the Titanic Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:53 am
== Dems, shoot for the moon.
Ask for the progressive income tax language to be on the 2018 ballot. Ask for the new tax rate brackets. Ask for the windfall, generated in a few years, to be the big tax swap to remove schools from property taxes. ==
YES!
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:59 am
Just thought I would remind GOP house members that Rauner’s money was unable to vote out senator McCann when he voted the right way. Get a backbone and vote for a budget with no strings attached.
Comment by How many months Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 11:06 am
If Durkin wants a budget so badly, doesn’t HE need Democrat votes to get that done? His whole “They need me and they better do what I say” attitude isn’t comromise at all.
Comment by NoEnd Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 11:43 am
the definition of compromise “an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions”. Compliance definition is “the action or fact of complying with a wish or command”. Rauner/Durkin they are two different words and expectations. Clearly you are not expecting to get anything done.
Comment by illinifan Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 12:02 pm
illinifan,
Governors work for compromise. CEOs demand compliance.
Comment by Cubs in '16 Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 1:16 pm
- RNUG - Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 10:59 am: =
I’m pretty sure the voters already voted that they want a Progressive Tax (otherwise known as the Millionaire Tax), but no bills were passed to change the tax law.
Comment by Mama Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 8:36 pm
== I’m pretty sure the voters already voted that they want a Progressive Tax (otherwise known as the Millionaire Tax), but no bills were passed to change the tax law. ==
That was a non-binding referendum / political stunt.
This time, put it on the 2018 ballot as a Constitutional Amendment … which, by the way, only requires House and Senate approval to put to the voters; the Governor does not directly have a say in any proposed amendment.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Jun 15, 17 @ 11:14 pm