Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Pritzker hit for the umpteenth time on taxes and Madigan
Next Post: Shaw loses again in fight to control state party
Posted in:
* I went over these comments by former Gov. Jim Edgar with subscribers this morning, so I’ll just let you debate them in comments…
The former governor said factors making it easier are that the income tax increase was taken care of last year, a slew of legislators are retiring at the end of this year and there’s intense pressure on lawmakers from voters to get something done. Edgar thinks it is especially crucial for Rauner to have a budget done ahead of his re-election campaign.
“I think he needs a budget as much as anyone in the state,” Edgar said. “I’m not sure he understands that, but I can tell him — and I’ve told him in the past — nothing’s more important for a governor than having a good budget because that allows you to manage the state to do your job. And if you do your job, it’s going to be a lot easier to get re-elected.” […]
But given that the governor is tasked with implementing the budget, Edgar said the process works better when the governor is involved. For instance, Edgar said the Department of Corrections would not have faced problems as simple as finding gas money if he had been involved in last year’s budget. […]
“To be able to win the state, you need more than just Republican votes,” Edgar said. “Democrats can win with just Democratic votes. But a Republican needs independents and, as I always said, thoughtful Democrats. And so, that’s why the budget is so important to him as well as it is to the entire state.”
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:08 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Pritzker hit for the umpteenth time on taxes and Madigan
Next Post: Shaw loses again in fight to control state party
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Someone — at some point, somewhere — told Rauner that the only way to force change is to not enact a budget.
Or maybe Bruce was smart enough to come up with that one by himself.
Either way — however Bruce arrived at this intellectual pinnacle — he’s not budging. So long as Rauner’s governor, he will not willingingly enact (or negotiate in a good faith) a budget.
Period.
Comment by Macbeth Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:13 am
As much as you like to snark about “Blame Madigan” it’s true.
Rauner wants a budget. But it doesn’t matter what he wants or does.
Madigan will never give him a budget he can sign. Madigan does not care about the state. He does not care about harm to social services and higher ed. All he wants is power, and that means Rauner has to be embarrassed at every possible opportunity.
If Madigan wanted a budget, he would’ve negotiated seriously on reforms to structural cost drivers like pensions. He would’ve worked with Rauner on some items of the Turnaround Agenda.
Also, Edgar really needs a dose of self awareness. He’s perhaps the primary culprit of our current financial trouble due to his awful pension ramp. Probably deserves more blame than Quinn or Blago.
Why anyone would take his advice on fiscal policy is beyond me.
Comment by Political Animal Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:15 am
@Political ANimal: Wow man. You want to say there’s blame to go around I’m all with you, but you’re trying to say that Rauner is completely blameless and Madigan is the root of all evil? Wow. Try to hold off on the Kool-Aid.
Comment by Perrid Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:21 am
===“I think he needs a budget as much as anyone in the state,” Edgar said. “I’m not sure he understands that, but I can tell him — and I’ve told him in the past — nothing’s more important for a governor than having a good budget because that allows you to manage the state to do your job. And if you do your job, it’s going to be a lot easier to get re-elected.” […]==
The only way, I can see, that Rauner purposely ignoring this 3 year plea is that, as discussed, it’s the feature not the bug, and Rauner fully believes “because Madigan” and “Madigan’s hand picked Governor”… and “taxes”… will be enough for Rauner to overcome the 26% approval he now “enjoys”.
If Janus fully goes Rauner’s way, and HB40 appeases Diana Rauner, and one or more state universities shut their doors in two years… Rauber will claim his lone term (if he were to lose) a resounding victory… a victory for the RaunerS, not to changing government or helping the state, but a victory for the $100 million the RaunerS personally invested for Raunerism.
For me, what Edgar is saying is but one thing, but it’s the left handed way of pointing out Raunerism isn’t even close to what governing looks like, and Edgar is pointing it out by stating what should happen, not what is actually happening… a passive-aggressive recognition of the Raunerism, and its failings without pointing out the objectives and/or successes
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:21 am
The thing is, Rauner doesn’t “need a budget as much as anyone in the state,” not by a long shot. The worst thing that can happen to him is he loses reelection and jets off to a lovely villa in Tuscany. The people who really need a budget are the people who rely on the services the budget pays for to survive. Rauner can squeeze the beast forever, and it’s never going to affect him personally beyond lowering his already low popularity.
It’s almost like electing ludicrously wealthy people to run the state isn’t a great idea…
Comment by Actual Red Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:21 am
===Rauner wants a budget===
Says who?
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:21 am
The issue of decreasing pensions for current employees has been ruled on. Period. Discussion should be about coming up with a amortization schedule over a period of time. ( say 30- 40 years) that gets us up to sound funding level.
Comment by Illdoc Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:22 am
Political animal- how would Madigan negotiate with a governor who believes in his way or the highway - enlighten me.
Comment by Pieroge tirebiter Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:22 am
Macbeth- Rauner and Zigmund did not think of this.
Donna Arduin spent months with each of them.
Did everyone forget her?
There is the sith right there
Darth Arduin
Comment by Honeybear Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:23 am
–Also, Edgar really needs a dose of self awareness. He’s perhaps the primary culprit of our current financial trouble due to his awful pension ramp.–
Yeah, such a terrible thing, actually coming up with a plan to pay the money you owe.
Definitely not the Rauner model of governance, paying what you owe.
And responsibility and accountability aren’t the Rauner model of politics. He is going to run as the Chronic Victim, a poor little weakling who wants to do good but the bad boys won’t let him.
Some of the people, all of the time, will buy it, no matter how screwball it is to pretend that Illinois governor is a weak office.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:24 am
==The issue of decreasing pensions for current employees has been ruled on. Period. Discussion should be about coming up with a amortization schedule over a period of time. ( say 30- 40 years) that gets us up to sound funding level.==
The 2013 reform was basically perfect. Best thing Quinn ever did.
After the Courts absurd and fiscally unsustainable decision, the Conversation needs to be about changing the constitution to make those reforms legal.
Comment by Political Animal Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:27 am
===Rauner wants a budget===
Yeah, ask former Leader Radogno, get back to me on that.
No governor in Illinois history had an entire General Assembly sit, and adjourn Sin Die without signing anything resembling or actually being a state budget.
So, you wanna say Rauner wants a budget?
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:28 am
=Rauner wants a budget. But it doesn’t matter what he wants or does.=
The budget that Rauner needs comes with a tax increase. The budget that Rauner wants does not. Therein lies the problem.
Comment by Pundent Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:29 am
===After the Courts absurd and fiscally unsustainable decision…===
“Pesky Constitution”
Fixed it for ya.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:29 am
Changing the Constitution would only effect new employees. Has been discussed many times on this site…….
Comment by Illdoc Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:29 am
==Madigan will never give him a budget he can sign. ==
Got one that 10 other Republicans could sign, but Rauner vetoed it.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:31 am
“Madigan will never give him a budget he can sign.”
One that takes collective bargaining for health insurance away from state employees, while the governor personally rakes in hundreds of millions of dollars, $279 million in two years? One that allows local governments to strip a lot of collective bargaining away and end prevailing wage?
Plus, who was it who blew up bipartisan compromise and slammed all reform attempts, even Madigan’s workers comp offer of compromise? Who refused every single offer? Union Bustin’ Bruce.
Rauner wants to take $470 million away from state employees through massive, unilateral health insurance cost increases and give them back $300 million for the step pay increases he illegally withheld from them. He thinks people are Fox News stupid.
“Madigan does not care about the state. He does not care about harm to social services and higher ed.”
Let’s look again at the unprecendented damage of the budget crisis, the worst in the nation: a million or more lost social services and providers closed or cut staff, higher ed was slashed, job growth was weak, debt skyrocketed, providers got stiffed, people kept moving out of the state and the rest. The common denominator of all of this was Bruce Rauner.
Comment by Grandson of Man Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:32 am
I suspect the main — perhaps the only — victory for Rauner will be Janus.
Janus goes his way — and it likely will — then they may pull the plug for everything else still backed up.
It’s also at that point, I suspect, Rauner will do a Christie — and suddenly forget the job (the job he’s already forgotten) he was elected to do. Governing — or Rauner’s version of it — will be about as exiciting as pulling down the grimy motorcycle cut overloaded with flair, tieing up a tie, and going to glad-hand at Maid Rite and pretend like “loose meat” sandwich makers in “small towns like Quincy” are the “backbone of Illinois.”
It’s one more Twitter picture, sure, but bigger, better things await … because Janus!
Comment by Macbeth Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:33 am
political animal: what part of “shall not be diminished or impaired” (language in the IL constitution) did the ILSC rule on that was absurd?
Comment by Steve Rogers Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:33 am
“If you do your job, it’s going to be a lot easier to get re-elected”
Apparently Jim hasn’t heard of OODA Loops…
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:35 am
Once again, we see or hear good advice from another governor who actually governed. And again, we see the trolls come out to attack the source rather than the advice. Rauner would have be in a better electoral position had he heeded Edgar’s advice.
Comment by Norseman Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:49 am
===”Rauner wants a budget”===
This is America…
Comment by Cool Papa Bell Friday, May 11, 18 @ 10:56 am
“”nothing’s more important for a governor than having a good budget because that allows you to manage the state “”
Rauner has shown that managing the state government is not his priority.
Changing the general political/economic environment (as he sees it) is more important to him.
Comment by walker Friday, May 11, 18 @ 11:04 am
===“If you do your job, it’s going to be a lot easier to get re-elected”===
Conversely, if you’re not going to do your job, why do you want to be re-elected?
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, May 11, 18 @ 11:14 am
And not doing his job has resulted in a 26% approval rating. Yet in spite of that there’s very little indication that Rauner would do anything different if given another 4 years.
Comment by Pundent Friday, May 11, 18 @ 11:23 am
==political animal: what part of “shall not be diminished or impaired” (language in the IL constitution) did the ILSC rule on that was absurd?==
The 2013 law did not diminish or impair any existing or earned benefit. No retiree would have seen their payment decrease. No worker would have seen their annuity decrease.
It was about controlling the future, yet to be earned, growth in those benefits.
The absurd part of that decision is the court essentially saying that any potential future growth can’t be changed after day one of hire.
Comment by Political Animal Friday, May 11, 18 @ 11:33 am
Rauner told us that his number one priority was shaking up Illinois and we assumed he meant that he would govern while leading us towards reforms. Wrong, eh?
Rauner had no intentions to govern. His intentions were to shake up Illinois, without concern over our fiscal, political or budgetary health. He was our Dr. Kervorkian, not our Dr. Welby. Rauner tried to put us in a terminal coma and didn’t care if we survived. To him, it’s all about shaking us up.
Edgar is correct. Governors take early hits to bring in the cash, then work to show value for the cash spent. Citizens want value. Illinois lost that and Rauner believed we wanted cheap government. So he didn’t govern.
Worse, Rauner raised taxes and failed to show us value. He made things worse. He then blew up GOP principles on life, government and leadership. He destroyed ILGOP.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, May 11, 18 @ 11:35 am
== After the Courts absurd and fiscally unsustainable decision, the Conversation needs to be about changing the constitution to make those reforms legal. ==
-Political Animal-,
Ignoring the IL Constitution’s Pension Clause, the IL SC would most likely have reached exactly the same decision for SB-1 based on State and Federal Contract Law.
How can I get so sure of this? In the 1975 IFT decision, the court reached back to pre-1970 IL Constitution IL cases and clearly cited them as part of the basis of that 1975 decision.
If you read the SB-1 decision, there does not appear to be any forced choice Tier 1 pension reform that would be legal. The only possible reform that would be legal would be a consideration option that allowed a voluntary choice … but that is not what is in the language of the Rauner / Cullerton pension bill.
There is such a voluntary consideration bill pending … but it ain’t Rauner or Cullerton’s bill. And withthat Bill’s options, I wouldn’t puck to opt out to what is effectively Tier 2 for what is being offered … and I doubt very many others will either.
The pension debt can’t be legally eliminated; it must be paid.
Comment by RNUG Friday, May 11, 18 @ 11:48 am
@RNUG,
I do not support the Rauner Cullerton Consideration bill. It’s quite obviously going to be struck down by this Court and doesn’t save enough money anyway.
Your reading of federal contract law is self serving and does not match with what I’ve been told by attorney’s who’ve argued in front of the US Supreme Court.
We need to change the Illinois Constitution and then reimplement the 2013 reforms. Though they may have to be more severe now that the special interests who fought that bill delayed the inevitable by 7 years.
Comment by Political Animal Friday, May 11, 18 @ 11:52 am
== yet to be earned, growth in those benefits. ==
Ah … The Sidley-Austin theory about unearned benefits … which the IL SC has make clear is not valid.
Comment by RNUG Friday, May 11, 18 @ 11:53 am
Political Animal: yes, it did diminish a benefit by stopping annual COLA increases. Many of the legislators who voted for it even questioned its constitutionality at the time. The way I understand contract law, both parties must meet the obligations of the contract. But the problem is not the contract, the problem is the failure of the state to make pension payments.
Comment by Steve Rogers Friday, May 11, 18 @ 11:54 am
===We need to change the Illinois Constitution and then reimplement the 2013 reforms===
I think you’re dreaming there.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 11, 18 @ 11:55 am
== Your reading of federal contract law is self serving and does not match with what I’ve been told by attorney’s who’ve argued in front of the US Supreme Court. ==
If it was the State regulating private sector pensions, you could have a valid argument. But the Feds grants very broad discretionary powers to the State when it is the State dealing with it’s own employee; not the same laws or playing field.
Comment by RNUG Friday, May 11, 18 @ 11:58 am
“did not diminish or impair any existing or earned benefit”
And your understanding is also incorrect. There’s no “earning” or “up to this point.” The benefit is defined (and cast in stone) on the date of first hire. No, firing all of them and re-hiring won’t work either.
Comment by Skeptic Friday, May 11, 18 @ 12:25 pm
Rauner is heading for a landslide, budget or no budget.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 11, 18 @ 12:26 pm
== Your reading of federal contract law is self serving and does not match with what I’ve been told by attorney’s who’ve argued in front of the US Supreme Court. ==
Oh, the old “I have friends who are lawyers” argument.
Pray tell us your friend’s name, and why aren’t they on the governor’s legal team?
Look, it is not that I would not put anything past this US Supreme Court. They would do anything they could to stick it to labor if they could. But they cannot nullify the Pension Clause of the Illinois Constitution without weakening the contract clause of the US Constitution. How do you think ComEd and AT&T and most importantly bond holders would feel if all of the sudden the state could just walk away from its financial obligations by passing a bill that includes a legislative finding that there is some sort of “fiscal emergency”?
Comment by Juvenal Friday, May 11, 18 @ 1:03 pm
====Rauner wants a budget=====
No he doesn’t.
If one finally happened it would be one less thing for him to attack Madigan over.
Comment by btowntruthfromforgottonia Friday, May 11, 18 @ 1:13 pm
Hello to all, the contents present at this website
are really amazing for people knowledge, well, keep up the nice work fellows.
Comment by skate ramps Tuesday, May 15, 18 @ 5:11 am