Rich, Sorry this isnt relavant to your new post, but I can't figure out how the new spending will be paid for. Beyond natural revenue growth, what makes up the rest of it (the $2 billion)? Is it the cig tax? New positions at boats? dipping into end of year balance? combination? or is it just unbalanced and we will figure out how to pay for it later? SOrry if this is somewhere out there, Its been a long day and my brain is slow.
Jackson
· 2 years ago
Hynes said he needed a budget passed or a court order.
Do you think the judge will act soon enough on this that he gets his court order?
Crimefighter
· 2 years ago
The delete the entire language then reinsert the entirity of a completely different item is the most screwy thing I've seen...that CAN'T be legal...
47th Ward
· 2 years ago
Ummm, they're lawmakers and thus make the law. Ergo, this is legal.
Whatever
· 2 years ago
Nothing has changed, there's the Have's and the Have Not's.
Rich Miller
· 2 years ago
Crimefighter, the General Assembly has been doing that since before any of us were born. Please, get a clue.
And MR, it's a combination of revenue growth (they upped the estimate after seeing - and needing - new projections), dipping into the end of year balance a bit, and closing some corporate loopholes. No casino, no cig tax on this one.
AsAMom
· 2 years ago
I think he will veto it and they will override him. They should use it as a bargainning chip-they will leave all 442 instances of the word travel in it - if he signs it. (Anyone good enough at math to process the totals?)
Anonymous ZZZ
· 2 years ago
Crimefighter - of course it's legal. Amending a bill to remove the original contents and add something else is common practice.
game plan
· 2 years ago
They didn't stop collecting sales taxes, or exise taxes, or gaming revenues, or you name the tax - it's being shipped to the Revenue Department/Treasury. The money is coming it, it's just not authorized to go out.
Example, who has the authoritity to say Lets leave the payment to last years amount?
This isn't a difficult decision, it's just that leaders have to discuss and say it's so through the passage of legislation. We need to thank Hynes for being the Knight and standing up to the Gov that there's no shinnanigans with un approprited dollars. Leadershp....
So Ill
· 2 years ago
Why would they have to pass a one-month budget? I mean, doesn't that just give the Governor what he wants?
Jaded
· 2 years ago
So if the Governor sits on the budget bill why would the GA have "no choice but to pass another 30 day budget". I mean this whole exercise has not been about getting a good budget, or getting employees or vendors paid, it has been about politics and egos.
If Blago sits on the budget, the onus is squarely on him for shutting down government. Why would Madigan pass a 30 day budget to let him off the hook? If Blago vetoes or changes the budget, he looks like he is sticking to his priorities, however if he just sits on it, he looks like a little kid pouting in the corner. Madigan and the Republicans win if that happens.
jwscott72
· 2 years ago
They would have to pass a one month (two if they smart) budget to make sure bills are paid (school aid, state workers' paycheck, etc..) when the Governor spends sixty days sitting on the bill and crying to anyone who will listen. If the man had any honor, integrity or common sense, he would sign the budget upon receipt.
dc
· 2 years ago
This is, really, a very simple process. The legislature produces a bill and the Governor, as the Chief Executive Officer, gets to make a decision to say yes or no. It is his responsibility to do that and the legislature, by passing a budget bill, has met their responsibility (regardless of whether you like the bill or not). Once the bill is passed, the ball is squarely in the Governor's court and he can actually do what he's being paid to do -- make executive decisions and let the chips fall where they may. If he vetoes the bill, let the process work itself through and live with the consequences of the legislature either accepting the veto or overriding it. It's clear from today's vote (99-9) that there doesn't appear to be a lot of support for accepting a veto.
As a former house staffer, I have to say I've seen some interesting budget negotiations but I've never seen a Governor as entrenched and completely schizophrenic as this one. It makes me glad that I'm no longer living in Illinois and paying taxes there.
Moderate Repub
· 2 years ago
So Ill - Thursday, Aug 9, 07 @ 3:38 pm:
Why would they have to pass a one-month budget? I mean, doesn’t that just give the Governor what he wants?
No it doesn't give him what he wants. What it would do is give him the opportunity to continue to lobby memebers to not override his veto that will come. It gives him 60 days from passage to not act on it. If he doesnt act then it becomes law anyway after 60 days. So the Presidient of the Senate and Speaker would have to keep their members in line for the override of the GOvs veto for the next 60 days. So what it does is it gove the GOv an extension to try and peel members away form their leaders by dangling pork (which Abby said she didnt like at a confrence (The $200 million in pork in the operating budget the GA will vote on this afternoon)), or threating them. Thanks Rich for clearing that up on the revenue growth question.
South of I-80
· 2 years ago
Sulg @ 2:46 on the "just in" thread.
The 7% Solution is an extension of a residential property tax exemption that is the place in Cook County. The original bill had a three year sunset provision attached to it, which expired at the end of 2006. The passage of the bill, HB664, will effect tax bills that will going out this fall. There is other language that is part of that bill, which deals with the uniform valuation of Wind Farms, new veteran's property tax exemptions and increasing the amounts of other exemptions that are already inplace.
Anon
· 2 years ago
"If the governor doesn’t veto the budget and simply refuses to sign it, the House and Senate may have no choice but to approve a one-month budget next week. That’s why Senate President Jones getting a new appropriations vehicle bill was so important today. He could use that for a one-monther. "
If I were them I'd actually pass a 60 day budget. At the end of that 60 days today's budget would either go into effect or HAVE to be vetoed by the gov... puts the onus on him.
Rich Miller
· 2 years ago
Jaded, Sen. Jones would likely come to the guv's rescue with the one-monther, so then the onus would be on Madigan and the House GOP.
John Bambenek
· 2 years ago
Anyone notice that the suit was filed in Christian and not Sangamon county? The 1991 case only made it to the 4th district of appeals... Christian County is in the 5th district...
So Ill
· 2 years ago
Rich has the real answer I was looking for, Mod-Rep, but thanks for the input.
Of course, Madigan also has the 'it was considered useless when I passed it before, why would I pass a one-monther again?' card.
opinionated
· 2 years ago
I think we are all talking a little too glibly (I'm talking to you, Jaded) about a govt shutdown. I mean, its not just egos. This has ripple effects across the entire state. It's not just state workers who 'signed up for this' - as someone remarked earlier. A shutdown also effects a lot of non-profits who have no operating budget without their govt program budget chunk, a lot of unsuspecting people turned away from those services and workers laid off completely. And non-profits rarely have the kind of money reservoirs to weather a month or so shortfall. Worst case scenario, it could mean losing their rental space or being set back financially to a level that would take 6 months to recover from. So I hope we aren't encouraging the leaders to think this is only about Egos.
One_Mcmad
· 2 years ago
Not to throw a monkey wrench in the union's lawsuit, but it appears that they aren't too familiar with state laws governing lawsuits filed against the state.
Pursuant to the State Immunity Act, 745 ILCS 5/1 which provides that “the State of Illinois shall not be made a defendant or party in any courtâ€. The lawsuit is without merit against the "State of Illinois" and Dan Hynes is protected by the "Tort Immunity Act" and the "Local Government and Governmental Tort Immunity Act" 745 ILCS 10/1-101.
John Bambenek
· 2 years ago
Learn about the terms you are using. They aren't filing a tort suit, so even citing those laws are meaningless. They are suing for declatory and injunctive relief, not for "harm" (i.e. tort).
The state will likely make the argument that this case belongs in the Court of Claims and not in the state court, but if they are arguing federal law too, likely the court won't chuck the case based on that.
Nate
· 2 years ago
So what about the budget makes it out of balance in the guv's eyes?
Jaded
· 2 years ago
Rich, That's a slam dunk for Madigan. He tells Emil and Rod to stick their 30 day budget and breaks out the ole:
"The House and the Senate have passed a 12 month budget that the Governor needs to act on. There is no need for a 30 day budget because the House and the Senate have already passed a 12 month budget. If the Governor makes changes to the budget that the House and the Senate have already passed, then the House will return to consider those changes."
I don't think he loses that argument in the media, but I have been wrong before and will be many times again.
Jaded
· 2 years ago
Sorry to be "glib" opinionated, but politics ain't beanbag. If the GA passes a budget and the Governor sits on it, go tell your sob story to him, because HE will be the reason your employees and not for profits don't get paid.
Oh, and nobody has to encourage the egos of the fab five. They are big enough without encouragement.
Plutocrat03
· 2 years ago
Spin, spin spin,
Page and the Chronicle used their poitions in the free press in a very ugly way and should be help responsible for that.
The lawers for both sides will stand to make a lot of mony, likely more than what is owed Justice Thomas.
Media players do nothing but stoke the fires of disinterst in the general public, while giving themselces a black eye in the process. Ultimately it is the honest reporter's story which is disbelieved.
One_Mcmad
· 2 years ago
John Bambenek - Thursday, Aug 9, 07 @ 4:15 pm:
Mr. Bambenek, I am very well aware of the terms that I am using and very familiar with the fact that Mr. Hynes is acting in his official capacity pursuant to a state law that he is evoking that doesn't allow him to issue checks without a state budget. If there is such a law, which I am not sure of, then he is acting pursuant to state law in his official capacity and is immune from any type of suit, tort or injunctory as he doesn't have the final say so, the law that he is evoking does. That is why yesterday he was quoted as saying that he will ask the Attorney General for an opinion on the matter.
If the Attorney General's opinion upholds the law he is evoking, that makes him even more immune from suit injuctory or tort.
But thank you anyway!
The 'Broken Heart' of Rogers P
· 2 years ago
Does anyone know how much (and what kind) pork is in the budget for the 14th District?
Why I like Hynes
· 2 years ago
Hynes spokeswoman Carol Knowles indicated the comptroller would not fight AFSCME if a judge rules quickly in the union's favor.
“We welcome the lawsuit because a court order could potentially allow us to legally pay state employees,†Knowles said.
annon
· 2 years ago
Wonder what's really up ?? I was told by someone that an "E" mail went out about 3pm today within a specific agency indicating to those workers etc. that the payroll would not be effected & fiurther indicated that they were "assured" that there would be no interuption of the next scheduled pay-date.
Little Egypt
· 2 years ago
LE Spouse just told me to stop making signs. :-(
He's not marching?
· 2 years ago
What a surprise. Coward.
Nickname
· 2 years ago
I heard Senate Dems are making changes to the budget draft. Anyone know what's going on?
BTW, moving a capitol bill that the Gov has discretion over is pointless. House Dems are not going to give him freedom to buy votes for the rest of his term.
So Ill
· 2 years ago
Marching in a parade seems like the perfect job for a Deputy Governor.
Sheila?
Why don't they
· 2 years ago
Just have somebody walk the route pulling a pinata with a poofy wig and jogging shoes? People might not even notice that it isn't him. And the pinata would absorb the eggs and tomatoes better.
Bubba
· 2 years ago
Can you say Governor Chicken....
curious george
· 2 years ago
Any bets on whether Blago will be a no-show for the official ribbin cutting??
Rich Miller
· 2 years ago
Bubba and others, back off. Would you march in a parade in this town right now if you were him? If you would, then we could use you in Iraq at the moment. My advice: enlist.
Don't Worry, Be Happy
· 2 years ago
So let me get this straight. The situation at the Capitol is fluid, so the Gov needs to stay close to home, so that the minute the budget passes he can rush into action and...refuse to do anything with it?
Tired of the mess
· 2 years ago
For give my optimism. but if the governor decides to sit on the budget for an extended perod of time, would it be cause for impeachment?
Jaded
· 2 years ago
Oh c'mon people. I really don't care for the guy either, but he would get eviscerated by the media, and probably by many of you if he went walking in the parade while all this is going on at the Statehouse. He is making the right choice. Don't think for a moment it is because he is scared. I don't think the guy scares easily.
A Citizen
· 2 years ago
Rich, I agree. I obviously don't like the guy but I too felt it unsafe. Too many wackos out there and smart not to take a foolhearty risk like that.
Thinking
· 2 years ago
Maybe he can just do a flyover in an IDOT plane instead.
A Citizen
· 2 years ago
So Little Egypt we must put our tomatoes back in the fridge for a while, Darn!
Learned Foot
· 2 years ago
John Bambenek wrote:
"Anyone notice that the suit was filed in Christian and not Sangamon county? The 1991 case only made it to the 4th district of appeals… Christian County is in the 5th district…"
Doesn't matter. As the Supreme Court wrote when those ex-con Chicago aldermen tried to get on the ballot this year, "The notion that circuit courts are bound only by the appellate court decisions from their own district is a relic of the pre-1964 Illinois Constitution of 1870 and has been expressly disavowed by our court. ... Until this court says otherwise, an appellate court's decision must therefore be followed regardless of the appellate court's district."
Of course, if it gets as far as an appeal to the 5th District, they could disagree with the 4th and make the issue ripe for review by the supremes.
Just Wonderin'
· 2 years ago
Does anybody know the number of times over the years (and who) a Governor hasn't walked in the parade/ribbon cutting?
Don't Worry, Be Happy
· 2 years ago
Flannery's shirt is fine. The problem is that the tie clashes with it.
annon
· 2 years ago
geezzzz??????? people are ready for some relief from this and the heat. as to a no-show at the fair...in all fairness i can't blame the guy for not marching or coming out in crowds as the "hate factor" is about as high as the temp. for this guy. even if your apolitical the distrust and anomosity for this dude is all around. you know i wish no-one evil or mis-fortune but you can bet some liquored up idiot in the crowd would try something. it's the way it is and we've got to deal with it in better ways. we're stuck with him till 2011. i hope he does the right thing , signs it and get on to the next thing. i hope the ga is learning from this too.
Jaded
· 2 years ago
"High handed, insulting and arrogant." Wow. I'll bet he is off the Christmas card list.
DWBH is right. I don't know much about fashion, but the tie and the shirt clash.
curious george
· 2 years ago
For once a wise decision made by the gov...no ISF Parade walk. ISP Executive Security would have had a really bad time with the expected "enthusiastic" fair parade watchers. They would have had to act like air raid watchers in WW II London watching for incoming V-2 rockets. Some Springpatch media outlets have spent the better part of the past several days entertaining/creative suggestions on how to best greet the gov. However, the PR spin about staying close to the dome for budget discussion reasons was interesting since that hasn't concerned Blago in the past weeks ...months...leading up todays potential vote.
All Comments
Sorry this isnt relavant to your new post, but I can't figure out how the new spending will be paid for. Beyond natural revenue growth, what makes up the rest of it (the $2 billion)? Is it the cig tax? New positions at boats? dipping into end of year balance? combination? or is it just unbalanced and we will figure out how to pay for it later? SOrry if this is somewhere out there, Its been a long day and my brain is slow.
Do you think the judge will act soon enough on this that he gets his court order?
And MR, it's a combination of revenue growth (they upped the estimate after seeing - and needing - new projections), dipping into the end of year balance a bit, and closing some corporate loopholes. No casino, no cig tax on this one.
Example, who has the authoritity to say Lets leave the payment to last years amount?
This isn't a difficult decision, it's just that leaders have to discuss and say it's so through the passage of legislation. We need to thank Hynes for being the Knight and standing up to the Gov that there's no shinnanigans with un approprited dollars. Leadershp....
If Blago sits on the budget, the onus is squarely on him for shutting down government. Why would Madigan pass a 30 day budget to let him off the hook? If Blago vetoes or changes the budget, he looks like he is sticking to his priorities, however if he just sits on it, he looks like a little kid pouting in the corner. Madigan and the Republicans win if that happens.
As a former house staffer, I have to say I've seen some interesting budget negotiations but I've never seen a Governor as entrenched and completely schizophrenic as this one. It makes me glad that I'm no longer living in Illinois and paying taxes there.
Why would they have to pass a one-month budget? I mean, doesn’t that just give the Governor what he wants?
No it doesn't give him what he wants. What it would do is give him the opportunity to continue to lobby memebers to not override his veto that will come. It gives him 60 days from passage to not act on it. If he doesnt act then it becomes law anyway after 60 days. So the Presidient of the Senate and Speaker would have to keep their members in line for the override of the GOvs veto for the next 60 days. So what it does is it gove the GOv an extension to try and peel members away form their leaders by dangling pork (which Abby said she didnt like at a confrence (The $200 million in pork in the operating budget the GA will vote on this afternoon)), or threating them.
Thanks Rich for clearing that up on the revenue growth question.
The 7% Solution is an extension of a residential property tax exemption that is the place in Cook County. The original bill had a three year sunset provision attached to it, which expired at the end of 2006. The passage of the bill, HB664, will effect tax bills that will going out this fall. There is other language that is part of that bill, which deals with the uniform valuation of Wind Farms, new veteran's property tax exemptions and increasing the amounts of other exemptions that are already inplace.
If I were them I'd actually pass a 60 day budget. At the end of that 60 days today's budget would either go into effect or HAVE to be vetoed by the gov... puts the onus on him.
Of course, Madigan also has the 'it was considered useless when I passed it before, why would I pass a one-monther again?' card.
Pursuant to the State Immunity Act, 745 ILCS 5/1 which provides that “the State of Illinois shall not be made a defendant or party in any courtâ€. The lawsuit is without merit against the "State of Illinois" and Dan Hynes is protected by the "Tort Immunity Act" and the "Local Government and Governmental Tort Immunity Act" 745 ILCS 10/1-101.
The state will likely make the argument that this case belongs in the Court of Claims and not in the state court, but if they are arguing federal law too, likely the court won't chuck the case based on that.
"The House and the Senate have passed a 12 month budget that the Governor needs to act on. There is no need for a 30 day budget because the House and the Senate have already passed a 12 month budget. If the Governor makes changes to the budget that the House and the Senate have already passed, then the House will return to consider those changes."
I don't think he loses that argument in the media, but I have been wrong before and will be many times again.
Oh, and nobody has to encourage the egos of the fab five. They are big enough without encouragement.
Page and the Chronicle used their poitions in the free press in a very ugly way and should be help responsible for that.
The lawers for both sides will stand to make a lot of mony, likely more than what is owed Justice Thomas.
Media players do nothing but stoke the fires of disinterst in the general public, while giving themselces a black eye in the process. Ultimately it is the honest reporter's story which is disbelieved.
Mr. Bambenek, I am very well aware of the terms that I am using and very familiar with the fact that Mr. Hynes is acting in his official capacity pursuant to a state law that he is evoking that doesn't allow him to issue checks without a state budget. If there is such a law, which I am not sure of, then he is acting pursuant to state law in his official capacity and is immune from any type of suit, tort or injunctory as he doesn't have the final say so, the law that he is evoking does. That is why yesterday he was quoted as saying that he will ask the Attorney General for an opinion on the matter.
If the Attorney General's opinion upholds the law he is evoking, that makes him even more immune from suit injuctory or tort.
But thank you anyway!
“We welcome the lawsuit because a court order could potentially allow us to legally pay state employees,†Knowles said.
BTW, moving a capitol bill that the Gov has discretion over is pointless. House Dems are not going to give him freedom to buy votes for the rest of his term.
Sheila?
"Anyone notice that the suit was filed in Christian and not Sangamon county? The 1991 case only made it to the 4th district of appeals… Christian County is in the 5th district…"
Doesn't matter. As the Supreme Court wrote when those ex-con Chicago aldermen tried to get on the ballot this year, "The notion that circuit courts are bound only by the appellate court decisions from their own district is a relic of the pre-1964 Illinois Constitution of 1870 and has been expressly disavowed by our court. ... Until this court says otherwise, an appellate court's decision must therefore be followed regardless of the appellate court's district."
Of course, if it gets as far as an appeal to the 5th District, they could disagree with the 4th and make the issue ripe for review by the supremes.
DWBH is right. I don't know much about fashion, but the tie and the shirt clash.