Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Was Rauner’s introduced budget better than the one he signed?

Posted in:

Illinois

* Gov. Rauner talked about the new budget in Batavia last week…

“The good thing is, it can be balanced with some management by my administration; we’ll do that, we’ll make it balanced,” he said.

Rauner claimed that if the General Assembly had passed his version of the budget in February, the state would be “running a $1.5 billion surplus.”

“We could use that to pay down bills, and improve our credit rating significantly,” he said. “We could be using it to invest in infrastructure, and we could do a tax cut every year.”

He just loves to talk about that $1.5 billion.

* So, how did Gov. Rauner’s original budget proposal fare against the one he signed into law? From the Civic Federation…

The General Funds budget is roughly balanced with $38.52 billion in revenues and $38.51 billion in spending, resulting in a projected surplus of $11 million. This is less than the Governor’s budget proposal, which had projected a surplus of about $350 million.

However, the enacted budget relies on fewer aggressive assumptions than the proposed budget did. The enacted budget fully funds State employee group health insurance, while the proposed budget relied on $470 million of prospective cost reductions. Nor does the enacted budget balance depend on shifting $619 million of net pension and health insurance expenses to schools, community colleges and universities, or reducing Medicaid reimbursements by $175 million, both of which had drawn significant opposition in the General Assembly.

* But…

However, the enacted budget does retain the assumption that the Thompson Center will sell for $300 million (netting the State $270 million in FY2019). Furthermore, like the proposed budget, the enacted budget does not account for the likelihood that Illinois will have to pay step increases to State employees who have not received them since the expiration of their contract in 2015. This cost could be in excess of $300 million.

Finally, the enacted budget introduces an aggressive assumption not included in the Governor’s proposal. The assumed $382 million in pension savings from the COLA buyout relies on a 25% participation rate by retiring employees and on successful implementation in FY2019.

Even if the budget achieves its stated balance at the end of FY2019, Illinois will still not have reduced the remaining backlog of bills during the fiscal year. The backlog, which peaked at $16.7 billion, was reduced by more than half during FY2018, largely thanks to the issuance of $6 billion in bonds. The interest cost of that borrowing is $1.9 billion over 12 years, but that is less than the steep interest penalties paid by the State on overdue bills.

However, the enacted budget does not anticipate any pay-down of bills in FY2019. Instead, the General Assembly passed a measure that could help alleviate the interest cost of outstanding bills. SB2858, if signed, would allow the State Treasurer to invest other State funds with the Comptroller, who would use the funds to pay off backlogged bills. The General Funds would pay a floating interest rate much lower than the 12% owed to vendors under the Prompt Payment Act or the 9% owed under the Timely Pay provisions of the Insurance Code. Proponents say the rates will likely exceed what the other State funds would have earned in more typical investments.

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 9:29 am

Comments

Promises promises

Comment by Red Rider Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 9:52 am
>“The good thing is, it can be balanced with some management by my administration; we’ll do that, we’ll make it balanced,” he said.

I’ll be content if the administration can “manage” to avoid unappropriated spending and spending at a pace that will run out of budgeted money before the end of the fiscal year. Sadly, that would be a huge improvement.

Comment by Earnest Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 9:56 am
To the question. There are a lot of numbers to compare. Evidence as to which budget is “better” can be found to support either choice.

One thing I’m certain of is Rauner has no clue as to what is in either budget.

Comment by don the legend Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 9:58 am
State workers were sold down the river by the GA.
It’s plain and simple wage theft
The courts agreed
Over 10,000 dollars has been
Illegally withheld from my wages.
And the GA
Is in on the theft.
All of it engineered for
Maximum damage
When Janus comes out.
The workforce Will
Totally collapse
Just think about what that will do to the
Current 3hour wait in our lobby
We’ve lost 25% of our caseworkers
Just wait till after Janus
Nearly everyone in my office
Is actively looking for another job
You can’t have a workerless
State government
And where are Rauners
Thousands of applicants
Like his administration
That was a lie

Comment by Honeybear Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 9:58 am
A governor, respected, could get 60 and 30 and get their budget, by working cooperatively with all sides.

Rauner himself was sidelined, faced a 152-20 overwhelming veto-proof majority vote that required Rauner to sign a budget that certified and vindicated the 32% tax increase… all by Rauner’s own signature.

If anything, it should come to no surprise to Raunerites that when Rauner does come up with something that could be better, a bipartisan General Assembly still won’t listen to a governor “not in charge”

What a failure Rauner is, when a budget that could be argued is better than one passed 152-20… because Rauner is the worst Republican governor in America… who’s word means less, and boxing Rauner in was needed to save Illinois from Bruce Rauner.

Whew.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 10:11 am
The enacted budget has fewer dollars dependent upon ridiculous aggressive assumptions than Rauner’s introduced budget. So I rate the enacted budget superior.

The Governors claim of a $1.5 billion surplus is bogus as his introduced budget only showed $350 million.

The other false claim I hear from Rauner and Durkin is that this is the first balanced budget in 15 years. Quinn had budgets that reduced payables while making pension payments as scheduled. Those budgets were more balanced than this one.

Comment by Last Bull Moose Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 10:17 am
“SB2858, if signed, would allow the State Treasurer to invest other State funds with the Comptroller, who would use the funds to pay off backlogged bills.”

Other State funds? Fancy balance sheet move there. What funds are getting caught up in that scheme? Seems like an “all your eggs in one basket” issue.

When I read Rauner’s statements about how important paying down the backlog is, it’s like watching a remake of the Sybil movie.

Comment by cdog Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 10:21 am
===“The good thing is, it can be balanced with some management by my administration; we’ll do that, we’ll make it balanced,” he (Gov. Rauner) said.===

Then Rauner will own those cuts in an election year.

Rauner wouldn’t own the Good Friday Masscare cuts, so now Governor Rauner will own withholding monies for things?

This will be fun.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 10:25 am
Yes Rauner can and has gotten 30 from the supermajority Democratic Senate but not 60 because of the “cooperative and professional” Speaker is neither.

We will see if his new lieutenants are any better at working with their own caucus, the Governor and minority in the House or if the top down, disastrous management style over the past few decades will continue.

Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 10:30 am
===60 because of the “cooperative and professional” Speaker is neither.===

So Governor Rauner is ineffective?

If the budget is better, Rauner couldn’t find 15 Democrats?

Speaks volumes to a failed governor, who’s not in charge.

Also, ignoring 152-20… No one was going to let Rauner ruin Illinois anymore without a budget. Rauner was frozen out, and signed a budget that Rauner now owns the 32% tax increase as 100% necessary and required… with no reforms…

… did I mention it was 152-20… lol

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 10:35 am
“So I rate the enacted budget superior.”

No question about it. Rauner already illegally withheld state employees’ step pay increases, and on top of that he wanted to gouge them with huge health insurance cuts. That’s a no-go, anymore. That illusion is over.

Rauner’s big hope is a Janus win. Then he can try to circumvent the GA and get his changes when right wing organizations launch campaigns to get workers to drop union membership.

Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 10:38 am
Rauners turnaround agenda budget claimed .5 billion in savings. The cost shift budget claims 1.5 billion. Pure genius

Comment by Rabid Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 10:45 am
LP

The Governor killed the compromise grand bargain last year. And this year’s budget process was pretty cooperative. You really need to adjust your bot programming because the garbage data you spit out isn’t consistent with the current realities. In other words, get new talking points.

As for disastrous management styles, Governor Rauner is pretty good at being a disaster of a manager.

Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 10:47 am
== it can be balanced with some management by my administration; we’ll do that, we’ll make it balanced==

So why in the world did we have to go through the no budget nightmare? He’s finally acknowledged that *gasp* he actually has the power to govern when it comes to expenditure of funds.

Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 10:54 am
So, the plan is that the state is going to borrow from the state by letting the state ‘invest’ funds in the state so the state can settle current liabilities?

I understand that this is fiscally sound and I understand that this is quite similar to the “Social Security Trust Fund” but given the blatant misunderstanding of how the Social Security Trust Fund works, I can see future politicians railing against this program — insisting that the state should not be forced to pay back the state for the money the state borrowed from itself.

I also understand the benefit of this proposal is that basically the state’s investments are as sound as the state’s ability to continue to enact taxes — but we’ve shown since we adopted the new constitution that we are terrible and irresponsible at assessing taxes on ourselves to pay for the services that we provide for ourselves.

It’s a good idea that’s come to Illinois to be ruined and driven into the ground.

Comment by Anon Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:03 am
The Governor killed the Grand Bargain? Turnaround agenda is only 500 million in annual savings? Cullerton pension reform alone is 1 billion in annual savings so your analysis is totally ridiculous..

The Grand Bargain was not passed or even debated in the House and was totally dismissed as unnecessary, just like bipartisan pension reform.

Except for that, the past 3 1/2 years is all Governor Rauner’s fault I guess

The current budget framework actually followed what the Governor said was required for his signature, a balanced budget with no new taxes.

Amazing what a difference that can make.

Buckle up because if JB wins, he has promised more spending and more tax increases and zero reforms

Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:03 am
===The Governor killed the Grand Bargain?===

Yes.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:19 am
=== ===The Governor killed the Grand Bargain?===

Yes.===

This is not up for discussion. This is not up for debate. Ask former Leader Radogno, and those Raunerites who worked to torpedo her at every turn.

I don’t mind arguing the merits, but this premise that you continually refuse to acknowledge historically proven facts, it’s tiring to chasing the truth that those who follow know.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:23 am
Q- Was Rauner’s introduced budget better than the one he signed?

A- A signed budget beats a possible budget, so my answer would be, No. And, as others have stated, if he plays around with enacting it, he owns those shenanigans, too.

Comment by Anon221 Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:24 am
I though in order for the Governor to “kill” something he has to veto it or not sign it in the first place.

I had no idea something that doesn’t even pass one chamber of the legislature can be killed by a Governor

I guess the Speaker totally dismissing the concept of a Grand Bargain had nothing to do with anything.

The Grand bargain was more of the same from Springfield, declare victory when you haven’t even moved the ball past the 50 yard line.

Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:28 am
==the past 3 1/2 years is all Governor Rauner’s fault I guess==

Would you stop being a victim. I’ve never said that. I keep pushing back against you because you have this victim mentality that seems to think that nothing is the Governor’s fault. And that argument is beyond laughable.

==The Governor killed the Grand Bargain? ==

Yes. It’s a fact that was well publicized. Attempting to argue otherwise only makes you look more silly that you usually look.

Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:28 am
===Turnaround agenda is only 500 million in annual savings?===

Take that fact up… with Gov. Rauner.

===The Grand Bargain was not passed or even debated in the House===

What happened in the Senate?

===The current budget framework actually followed what the Governor said was required for his signature, a balanced budget with no new taxes.===

It also validated and certified the 32% was 100% required to make the budget balance, and Rauner can’t explain away that signature or certifying that tax increase now… and getting zero reforms in 3 1/2 years. A failure by Bruce Rauner.

===Amazing what a difference that can make.===

Passing it 152-20… Rauner has no choice but to sign a budget with that 32% tax increase needed to balance it. Rauner faced four years of never signing a budget, or…

The 152-20 overwhelming veto proof majority… what a difference it made… to save Illinois from Bruce Rauner.

===…tax increases and zero reforms===

… like the budget Rauner himself just signed?

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:29 am
==he has promised more spending==

So has the Governor.

Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:32 am
===I had no idea something that doesn’t even pass one chamber of the legislature can be killed by a Governor===

You cannot possibly be this stupidly obtuse. I just refuse to believe it. And that leaves me with no other conclusion to draw that your sole purpose is to deliberately plant false propaganda on my site.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:34 am
===I though in order for the Governor to “kill” something he has to veto it or not sign it in the first place.

I had no idea something that doesn’t even pass one chamber of the legislature can be killed by a Governor===

Explain that to former Leader Radogno.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:35 am
==I though in order for the Governor to “kill” something he has to veto it or not sign it in the first place.==

So basically what you are saying is that the Governor doesn’t really have a role in the legislative process until a bill arrives on his desk? Is that the ridiculous argument you are making?

LP the Governor killed the Grand Bargain. Period. End of story. It’s a fact. Give up your ridiculous argument otherwise. You’re peddling dishonesty.

Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:38 am
==I had no idea something that doesn’t even pass one chamber==

==I guess the Speaker totally dismissing the concept of a Grand Bargain==

How would we know that if it didn’t pass the Senate. You can’t even keep your arguments straight.

Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 11:42 am
=“The good thing is, it can be balanced with some management by my administration; we’ll do that, we’ll make it balanced,” he said.=

Did the Governor have an epiphany and realize that the Governor’s Office is has authority over a significant portion of state government…..
-OR-
Does this amount to an admission that the Governor intentionally ran a big tab and intentionally sought to damage the state, all while baltantly lying about it?

Comment by Duopoly Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 12:23 pm
===Other State funds? Fancy balance sheet move there. What funds are getting caught up in that scheme?

Federally we borrow from our excess Social Security Revenues which allowed the US Government to save billions in interest. This is done by the US Government promising to pay back the funds as needed by the Social Security Administration to pay benefits.

It’s not a bad idea, it just relies on the Future Version of the United States of America promising to pay the Future Version of the Citizens of the United States of America the funds the past and present versions Citizens of the United States of America lent to the past and present version of the United States of America.

===Seems like an “all your eggs in one basket” issue.===

It’s only a bad plan if one anticipates that the basket is faulty. Given that the State of Illinois is unable to claim solvency and has the authority to raise revenues, it shouldn’t be that risky.

The only risk is that the future version of the People of Illinois will elect law makers that intend to have the future version of the State of Illinois not pay back the past and present version of the People of Illinois.

Which, you know, we might do, seeing as how we’ve been sending State Legislators to the capitol that believe in magic beans for decades.

Pardon, not magic beans, “balancing the budget by cutting waste.”

Comment by Anon Monday, Jun 11, 18 @ 12:52 pm