Christina Tobin, Founder and Chair of Free & Equal Elections, interviewed on Reality Report, discusses the origin, purpose, and structure of the organization; petition drive efforts, including challenges and lawsuits here in Illinois; actions of elected Illinois politicians; and other issues affecting Illinois and elsewhere.
Illinois is closing out July in style and gearing up for more politics in August. The same day Gov. Rod Blagojevich unveiled a “compromise” capital plan to fund road and school construction projects throughout the state, his office was sued along with Senate President Emil Jones Jr.’s office for not releasing budget-related details. And the governor’s idea to transfer nearly 150 positions from Springfield three hours south to Harrisburg is the subject of hours of testimony opposing the idea, although southern Illinois folks like the idea of an economic boost. (More on that in the next post.) And after all that in one day, the condition of state government is unlikely to change any time soon.
I write “compromise” in quotes because there’s no deal on the capital plan without all parties on board. Although the governor’s office made a gesture to compromise by getting rid of the revenue source that House Speaker Michael Madigan ruled out — expanded gaming — it’s clear that the governor’s revised proposal still lacks support from House Democrats. The new version reduces the spending amount from $34 billion to $25 billion. So, yes, the casino-less proposal satisfies three of four caucuses, but those three caucuses were on board in the first place.
House Democrats’ concerns about the first plan still stand. Most prominently, they still don’t trust the governor to fairly distribute the capital funds. House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie, a Chicago Democrat who represented the speaker in today’s meeting and in previous leaders’ meetings, reiterated Madigan’s stance: House Democrats won’t get on board unless the spending side of the capital plan is crystal clear. Steve Brown, Madigan’s spokesman, said specific line items are an “absolute requirement.” In an e-mail after the meeting, Currie echoed: “Assuming we could reach agreement on the revenue side — a big assumption — we would definitely want line-item allocations and some way to guarantee that dollars allocated are actually spent.”
Her kicker: “So I think we continue to be on a very steep uphill climb.”
The governor’s revised revenue ideas still lack consensus. House Democrats repeatedly have questioned the wisdom of the first revenue source: selling off all or part of the Illinois Lottery to the private sector. The state asset generates money for public education and has been estimated to be worth more than $10 billion, leading some to question why the state would sell it rather than revamp it and maximize its value. Proponents say the private sector could be more efficient and aggressive in managing the lottery’s potential.
Currie said, however, that privatization also could negate the original intent and appeal. “The lottery was originally sold as a way to help education, so buying a losing lottery ticket still helped the kids. Take away education, and people may feel they’ve been bamboozled.”
The governor’s proposal does include a “lockbox” for capital investments and lottery proceeds for education. And supporters of the lottery lease say the upfront cash and the ongoing state share of the profits would ensure that public schools would receive at least the same amount under the public-private partnership.
The other funding idea includes transferring higher-than-expected revenues from two state taxes, the motor fuel tax that goes into a dedicated Road Fund and the sales tax on gasoline that goes into the general revenue fund. Currie said her caucus could consider using “excess” revenues from the motor fuel tax (a.k.a. Road Fund) if the administration proves that the money would go directly to capital construction projects. Transferring excess revenues from the state sales tax on gasoline (a.k.a. general revenue fund) is a different story. “Diversions from GRF — which, essentially, is what taking gasoline sales taxes really is — could be a very tough sell,” Currie said. Without support from House Democrats, a capital plan is unlikely to advance.
Another lawsuit
Two nonprofit groups supporting limited government are suing Gov. Rod Blagojevich and Senate President Emil Jones Jr. for denying access to budget-related documents.
The Illinois Chapter of Americans for Prosperity based in Chicago and Judicial Watch Inc. based in Washington, D.C., filed suit in Sangamon County. They allege that both offices repeatedly denied requests under the Freedom of Information Act to release information about how a lump sum of $1.7 billion was spent in fiscal year 2008. In a Statehouse news conference Thursday, the two groups justified their suit by citing newspaper reports about questionable grants doled out by individual legislators. They’re asking the court to require Blagojevich and Jones to release information about specific uses of the money.
They’re targeting so-called member initiatives that distribute state grants to local nonprofits or units of local government, and so on, and the grants aren’t subject to competitive bidding processes or to legislative debates. Projects often are lumped together in a single dollar amount and lack specific descriptions of how that money would be used.
Jones’ office says its attorneys are reviewing the suit and don’t have a comment. I’m still waiting for a response from the governor’s office.
Joe Calomino, director of the Illinois Chapter of Americans for Prosperity, said the group did not sue House Democrats or Republicans because they released detailed information about money issued for member initiatives.
The group, which publishes an online blog called Pork Report, also is behind legislation that would create a Web site to track all money spent on all districts, all state contracts, all state employees and all tax credits to improve government transparency. It was intended to serve as a one-stop shop for taxpayers. The measure was unanimously approved by the House but stalled in the Senate.
By Bethany Jaeger
On the same day Gov. Rod Blagojevich issued a massive executive order to combine more state agency functions, a Cook County judge ordered that Blagojevich’s administration has to stop expanding a state health program to middle-income adults. But that’s not going to stop Blagojevich from trying. In the meantime, residents who already started receiving state-sponsored health care under the governor’s expansions are left in limbo over whether they’ll continue to receive those benefits. We'll have more on the governor's move to consolidate state agency functions tomorrow. It’s a mess.
The governor’s office already issued a statement that said it would address the judge’s concern about his health care expansions and continue to expand the FamilyCare program to more families. (The administration also announced a statewide tour about health care, seen here.) Legislators, in the meantime, continue to say they support health care but oppose the way the governor goes about expanding it without a way to pay for it.
Tuesday’s court order is only one of two lawsuits involving the governor’s authority to expand health care through executive power rather than through the legislative process. The governor also sued Secretary of State Jesse White for not publishing rules to implement the expansions, preventing the administration from acting. White’s legal team has until May 2 to respond to the governor’s lawsuit.
On Tuesday, Cook County Judge James Epstein technically didn’t rule on whether the governor could expand health care programs without legislative approval. On one hand, he decided that the administration was within its rights to extend an existing program for breast and cervical cancer screenings to women age 65 and older. He said the legislature approved $6 million for the program without imposing limits, allowing the department to expand the benefits as long as it was within that $6 million appropriation.
On the other hand, Epstein denied the governor’s ability to expand FamilyCare, which would offer state-sponsored health insurance to 147,000 adults from middle-income families for about $43 million in the first year. Because the FamilyCare program would offer state and federal Medicaid benefits to adults making up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level, the program would have to abide by federal income limits and work requirements. This is technical, but the judge ruled that because the FamilyCare expansion as written doesn’t require the adults to be “employed or engaged in a job search,” the expansion fails to meet federal requirements and wouldn’t be reimbursed.
That means the administration is prohibited from expanding FamilyCare until a full trial decision or until the department changes or cancels the expansions. Epstein’s ruling also said that complaint filed by Richard Caro, a Riverside attorney, and by Republican businessman Ron Gidwitz and Greg Baise, president and chief executive officer of the Illinois Manufacturer’s Association, on behalf of the Illinois Coalition for Jobs, Growth, and Prosperity, likely would succeed in a full trial.
Caro, who maintains a Web site dedicated to the lawsuit, said in a phone conversation last week that he actually supports universal health care, but he objects to the governor’s use of executive power to spend state dollars without legislative approval. : “I filed to stop an unconstitutional, illegal expenditure,” he said. “Once the legislature approves the expansions, all well and good. It’s for the executive to work out with the legislature in the normal democratic process how best to proceed.”
State Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat, is a member of the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules that repeatedly rejects the governor’s executive power in trying to expand health care. He’s also sponsoring legislation that would do the same thing the governor is trying to do through his administrative powers. It hasn’t gone anywhere, but Lang said lawmakers would be more likely to help him accomplish his health care goals if the governor would sit down and negotiate.
Rep. Brad Bursynzki, a Clare Republican and JCAR member, said to expect lawsuits filed by the adults who were promised health care benefits under the governor’s expansion. “I have to tell you, I had a smile on my face when I heard about the injunction this morning,” he said. “But having said that, I really feel very deeply for the people that were enrolled in this program who now are going to be — I don’t think they’re going to be held harmless.”
NOTE: A House committee is considering a proposal to establish a form of universal health care right now. The so-called Healthy Illinois plan has been dormant for two years, so watch for an update about why it’s being considered now. It’s expected to advance out of committee tonight. (Four Democrats already voted in support of the plan and walked out of committee.)
Immigration rights
By Patrick O’Brien
More than 100 new American citizens rallied at the Statehouse today to lobby lawmakers on behalf of legal and undocumented immigrants.
They included Korean, Polish, Mexican, African and Arab immigrants who recently became citizens through the state’s New Americans Initiative, a program designed to help immigrants navigate the citizenship process.
The Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights sponsored the day, in part to voice opposition to a House proposal that directs the state to report undocumented immigrants convicted of crimes to the federal government for deportation.
The measure’s sponsor, Carol Stream Republican Rep. Harry Ramey, says it’s just a matter of making convicted criminals leave the country, not of targeting innocent immigrants. “We’re talking about the bad guys.”
Fred Tsao, the coalition’s policy director, says the state’s Department of Corrections opposes the bill and says it’s “an attempt to score political points on the backs of undocumented immigrants.”
The coalition also wants lawmakers to provide an additional $500,000 in funding for the state’s citizenship program to address the growing number of applicants in Illinois. Applications in Illinois have doubled during the national debate over immigration policy by some estimates.
The coalition also wants to push a proposal that would allow undocumented detainees to have greater access to clergy and other religious counsel while in jail. A House committee is scheduled to hear the plan tomorrow.
Yuridia Carbajal of Waukegan recently became a citizen after 12 years in the United States. She says the opposition to undocumented immigrants is driven by fear of their potential political power. “They want us to be afraid of them, but I think they’re afraid of us.”
By Bethany Jaeger
Thursday’s House rejection of a new state income tax structure isn’t a done deal. We knew it could come back in some form, but Rep. Gary Hannig, a Litchfield Democrat and deputy majority leader, filed a “motion to reconsider” after yesterday’s vote. (Scroll to the bottom of this page to see record of Hannig’s motion.) The maneuver allows the chamber to take another whack at the same legislation, maybe with some changes.
Twice last year legislators used the motion to block legislation from advancing even though it received enough votes to pass. Senate Democratic leadership halted an electricity rate deal from advancing to accommodate a particular utility (scroll down to "procedural maneuvering"). Downstate House members stopped a budget deal from advancing to gain leverage for electricity rate relief.
Hannig’s move was the opposite. The income tax measure failed, and Hannig was one voting against it. He said in a phone conversation Friday that he told the sponsor, Rep. Mike Smith, a Canton Democrat involved in education matters and passionate about education funding reform, that he agreed with him philosophically but didn’t think the constitutional amendment was ready to go on the ballot. So Hannig voted against the measure, but he filed a motion to reconsider so that Smith would have an opportunity to bring the measure back with some changes that potentially could change some Democratic and Republican “no” votes to “yes” votes.
So, yes, you can bet on Smith’s measure coming back sooner rather than later. Constitutional amendments must be approved by both chambers before May 4, and given that the measure still needs to be revised, approved by the House, read three different times and approved in the Senate, with a week off April 21-25, Hannig said the House would need to reconsider the measure rather quickly.
Rewriting the rules
By Bethany Jaeger
House Speaker Michael Madigan sent a letter to lawmakers today to describe implications of Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s lawsuit against Secretary of State Jesse White. White’s office refused to publish administrative rules to the governor’s desired health care expansions because the rules never received approval from the legislative Joint Committee on Administrative Rules. Because the two offices disagree on the authority of JCAR and, therefore, the ability to publish the rules so the administration can enact the expansions, they want direction from the court, as one agency spokeswoman said this morning. “Both parties in this case recognize that the lawsuit is part of a process intended to clarify the laws surrounding healthcare expansions and JCAR’s constitutional standing,” said Ruth Igoe, spokeswoman for the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, which filed the suit and runs the programs. “We consider this an amicable process.”
Madigan disagrees and described the lawsuit in the letter as a “back-door effort to implement the governor’s policies.”
“The lawsuit, filed at the governor’s direction, is an explicit statement that he does not want executive agencies to work in a cooperative manner with the legislature,” he wrote.
The governor’s office did not return a phone call.
Watch Illinois Issues magazine for more about the implications of the lawsuit.
Redrawing the map
By Patrick O’Brien
The battle that ensues every 10 years to draw the map for legislative districts could be solved by more than names drawn from hat if a new measure becomes law.
The proposed constitutional amendment has the support of House Speaker Michael Madigan, according to Mike Lawrence, director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.
Lawrence, long-time journalist and former spokesman for then-Gov. Jim Edgar, says the proposal would take the element of chance out of the controversial task of updating district boundaries every 10 years. And it would be designed to make it easier for the two chambers to compromise. Currently, both chambers must agree on the same map. Under this proposal, the House and Senate would draw and approve separate maps, essentially controlling their own destinies.
If the two parties can’t agree on how to compose the map, two Illinois Supreme Court justices would appoint a so-called special master to redraw the map. The special master usually is a lawyer, Lawrence says.
Since 1981, lawmakers have come to a standstill three times. So they randomly drew from a hat to pick the winning party that would redraw the map.
Control of the process typically benefits that party, often because districts are oddly designed to produce certain results.
For the state’s Republican Party, the next redistricting in 2010 may be especially important because of the changing demographics of Illinois, particularly in the Chicago suburbs.
The Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan think tank in Washington, D.C., reported last month that self-identified Republicans account for only 25 percent of Illinoisans. Democrats account for 35 percent, and independents 40 percent.
As more people leave Chicago and Cook County for the suburbs, Democrats gain strength in the suburban counties.
Lawrence says the plan would take some of the political venom out of the process and restore geographical sense to the map.
A House committee will hold a public hearing on the measure next week.
© Blogger template The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008
Back to TOP
