CapitolFax.com - Latest Comments in Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Mad Max — Sat, 24 May 2008 08:15:50 -0000

Regarding Emil Jones and Ricky Hendon and pay raises for these poor hard-working politicians down in Springfield: Keep it up guys! Taxpayers are looking for one more reason to sweep out of office the Blagojevich Democrats down in Springfield. You are certainly giving them all of the reason that they need!

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Concerned Voter — Fri, 23 May 2008 16:13:13 -0000

"Jaded - Friday, May 23, 08 @ 9:48 am: You know the Sen Repub and Garrettâ€™s schtick is growing almost as old and the Hendon Jones Keystone Cop routine. If they donâ€™t want the pay raise, have a press conference telling everyone they plan to donate the extra cash to the March of Dimes, and be done with it."

Jaded, the problem is, the state is in a fiscal crisis. At least that's what they tell the different state agancies and employees. Agencies that right now have no money for different items until after June 30th. They shouldn't have to give the money back, those pay raises shouldn't be given to begin with.

Many unions representing state employees are in negotiations right now for new contracts. It looks awfully bad for the muckity mucks to get nice raises and then turn around and cry poor mouth to the employees.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

A Citizen — Fri, 23 May 2008 14:46:55 -0000

The Senate's failure to vote on the pay raise results in the statutory process being blocked from completion. Seems the citizens have a legitimate legal right for the completion and thus a basis for a suit against Emil et al for denying due process. I say "sue the honorable peoples' representatives" and demand the cost of the raises as the remedy sought.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Gentlemen, behold! — Fri, 23 May 2008 14:29:57 -0000

===About what a junior public defender makes.===

I'm not sure about that one. Plus, I don't think that legislators are loaded down with loans from law school. I know legislators make and will make a lot more than assistant attorney generals, who haven't gotten a raise for a couple years now.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Douglas M. — Fri, 23 May 2008 14:07:03 -0000

Disgusted, this link has names of the board members from 2002. That's all I could find on them.
http://www.prairienet.org/i...

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Sigh — Fri, 23 May 2008 13:32:32 -0000

Thanks, Ricky. Another year of no raise for me from your buddy Blah - that makes it six years in a row - but you take care of yourself and don't worry about anyone else. That's what leadership is all about.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

VanillaMan — Fri, 23 May 2008 13:21:55 -0000

It is brazen. But you can be brazen when you have no one to challenge you. Hendon is not only brazen, he is enjoying rubbing our noses in it.

How low can Illinois government go?

Those with challengers will need to create a plausible excuse for the salary increase this year.

But there are no excuses for it, nor for Hendon.

Go Con-Con 2008!

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Belle — Fri, 23 May 2008 13:07:24 -0000

Legalized corruption isn't it? Usually you get something of value for your money. In Illinois its like a subprime program for politicians.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Rich Miller — Fri, 23 May 2008 13:01:36 -0000

===They get outstanding pay===

About what a junior public defender makes.

===They donâ€™t work 40 hours per week, 50 weeks per year===

Not all do, but many do.

Still, as far as the political moment is concerned, it's not a good idea.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

The Cowgirl — Fri, 23 May 2008 12:59:38 -0000

We saw a legislator's vehicle in the parking lot last evening. It had the legislator plates. It was a fully loaded, new Yukon! From what that legislator could afford to drive, I don't think his or her family is deprived. It would be nice to get a raise now and again. They get outstanding pay, a top-notch pension (not like that of regular state employees), and excellent fringe benefits. They don't work 40 hours per week, 50 weeks per year, so they should not be paid a full-time salary.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

South of I-80 — Fri, 23 May 2008 12:51:07 -0000

One good thing about the pay raise, is that, once it takes effect, President Emil Jones will not have to borrow from he's election campaign funds!:)

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Dan S, a Voter & Cubs Fan — Fri, 23 May 2008 12:34:02 -0000

Very sorry, undersatand explaining a bit more didn't think the language was out of line but it's your blog

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Rich Miller — Fri, 23 May 2008 12:29:13 -0000

Dan S, language and the driveby nature of the comments. Explain a bit more. Thanks. :)

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Downstater — Fri, 23 May 2008 12:03:31 -0000

The sad fact is that Blago, Jones and their cronies could care less about what taxpayers think. They do not live in reality. Does anyone with an open mind really believe that these bozos deserve a raise? What have they done successfully over the last few years to deserve a raise? I sure cannot think of anything. If I was their employer I would fire them. Oops, I am along with the rest of the common people of this state. The great state of Illinois. Politics like no other.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Dan S, a Voter & Cubs Fan — Fri, 23 May 2008 12:03:09 -0000

Rich, you deleted me twice in this thread, just for my own reference what did I do wrong?

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Question — Fri, 23 May 2008 11:54:54 -0000

Can we vote to change the budget process to every two years if we have a con-con?

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Squideshi — Fri, 23 May 2008 11:37:21 -0000

Two pieces of information to which more of the public needs better access:

1. The current and historical salaries of their elected representatives.

2. Information on how the relationships REALLY work behind the scenes when it comes to the House and Senate Rules Committees.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Sir Reel — Fri, 23 May 2008 11:25:17 -0000

I know the pay raises are drop in the bucket in the overall scheme of things, but I'm tired of those who say legislators who oppose the raises can just donate theirs' to charity. The fact remains that taxpayers have to pay regardless of the end result. Other needs won't be met because funds will go to raises/donations. And remember, these raises up the cost for all future years.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Commonsense in Illinois — Fri, 23 May 2008 11:23:47 -0000

That Ricky Hendon...isn't he just a hoot?

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

wordslinger — Fri, 23 May 2008 11:20:46 -0000

Silly little comedy between Hendon and Jones. I don't think it can really be spun successfully, but it appears that Jones would like Hendon to take the heat on this one. Silly, but interesting.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Cassandra — Fri, 23 May 2008 10:56:33 -0000

It's my recollection that Blago did propose some minor changes to reduce future pension debt by trimming the state's cheap and lavish pension benefits for incoming state workers but the legislature wouldn't go along. They were likely fearful of losing "campaign contributions" from state employee unions. And apparently the general public wasn't interested enough to weigh in--even though an increasingly small minority can look forward to pensions of their own. Guess they don't mind paying for pensions for others instead of putting the money towards their own retirements.

In light of the venality of the legislature and the indifference of the electorate, we can hardly criticize the new pension borrowing plan, which is an effort, however flawed, to deal practically with a situation about which we all had plenty of warning.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Jaded — Fri, 23 May 2008 10:48:41 -0000

You know the Sen Repub and Garrett's schtick is growing almost as old and the Hendon Jones Keystone Cop routine. If they don't want the pay raise, have a press conference telling everyone they plan to donate the extra cash to the March of Dimes, and be done with it.

Also, the comp review board is made up of 12 non government non lobbyist private citizens appointed by the 4 legislative leaders (3 each). The Legislative Research Unit will have a list of the members. If for some reason they won't tell you, call your legislator, they have to give a list to them.

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Ghost — Fri, 23 May 2008 10:47:35 -0000

Hendon is about as inepedent from Jones as is Jones Kidney.

Wat bother me most about hendon and Jones, is they seem to perceiev the average voter to have very little on the ball to see thorugh such a tranparent stage play.

Besides the obvious falsity, the reality is Jones pulled halverson for not doing what he wanted, so there is no reason to beleive he would not do the same with Hendon is Hendon was doing anything Jones did not want.

Jones 1
Stringless puppets 0

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

ChiCountryGuy — Fri, 23 May 2008 10:42:31 -0000

Chicago - Run by Chicago democrats. Condition: Horrible.

Cook County - Run by Chicago democrats. Condition: Horrible.

State Gov't - Run by Chicago democrats. Condition: Even worse than Cook County and Chicago combined.

Presidential Candidate Barak Obama - Chicago Democrat.

And Senator Obama wants our vote for President?

Re: Surprise! Senate won’t vote on pay raise rejection

Anonymous — Fri, 23 May 2008 10:31:20 -0000

There may be a small silver lining in this. Since the pay raises don't take effect until 30 "session days" after the plan is submitted, the members (for appearance's sake) may try to avoid using up those 30 session days until after the November election, thereby preventing a marathon overtime summer session like we saw last year.