No surprise Blago wanted public broadcasting cut; he hates any media he hasn't paid for or otherwise managed.
Cassandra
· 2 years ago
Have you ever been to Flossmoor? The median income there is slightly over $100,000 a year.
Communities with median incomes over twice the national average don't need $1,000,000 worth of goodies from the state Legislature....from us, in other words.
Rich Miller
· 2 years ago
Cassandra, Scully's district includes a whole lot more than just Flossmoor.
Anonymous
· 2 years ago
I found it somewhat difficult to review the budget material since my only source was some PDF files rather than spreadsheets. And, when I did tally up the cuts in the Gov's message, I got something over $470M rather than just $464...but the SJ-R carried a figure similar to mine.
Anonymous
· 2 years ago
I also noticed that about 3.7% came from payments to Employees retirement, and 2.7% from payments to Social Security. I found it interesting that some Correctional facilities were hit harder than others ones...wonder why?
Anonymous
· 2 years ago
The veto included $1.18M from Public Health for Expenses associated with Pandemic Flu Preparedness.
BLAH
· 2 years ago
You can view the entire list of vetoes or find them broken down by category here:
If anything is going to be the Governor's undoing in the court of public opinion, it'll be that state plane. First, it was the nearly $6K daily flights to/from Springfield. Now, it's the plane's $134K makeover - particularly in comparison with so many of the worthy projects that were reduced or eliminated by veto.
I've got an older relative in northern IL who doesn't pay all that much attention to state gov't and political news. But he not only knows about that plane business, he repeats it over and over: "How dare the Governor put himself on that level, far above everyone else's concerns?" And this from a guy who once supported the Governor.
It's incredible that Team Blago doesn't seem to be able to understand this.
Anonymous
· 2 years ago
Thanks, BLAH! Still PDF files but at least they can be exported into spreadsheets more easily. Much more interesting to review. Don't see any tally of the entire budget on their web site. That'd be helpful also.
VanillaMan
· 2 years ago
If Blagojevich was a Republican, we can just blame blind partisanship and poor leadership skills for his behavior. He would just look like an idiot politician playing partisan games.
But the reality is far more frightening, isn't it?
This guy is not only nuts, he is burning-down-the-house-around-him nuts.
Can he get any uglier? We sadly, have three more years to find out, don't we?
BLAH
· 2 years ago
Anonymous - check out the first report on the website. It is here: http://www.ctbaonline .org/All%2 0Links%20t o%20Research%20A reas%20and%20Report s/Budget,%20Tax%20and %20Revenue/Governor's%20Veto %20Analysis%20CTBA.pdf
I am just so thankful that Blagojevich did away with "business as usual" in the State of Illinois!
steve schnorf
· 2 years ago
Rich, just to give everyone a chance to show how easy it would be to veto $450-500 million out of a budget, why don't you ask a qotd having them do just that (real numbers, of course, not fantasies)?
Princeville
· 2 years ago
Question for Annoymous @ 8:59 am--was wondering if this cut in Pandemic Flu Preparedness was due to additional federal funding ? There was an announcement on 28 June from US Dept HHS and then additional grant money announced on 31 Aug. Do we get the federal funds and thus the state fund was cut or do we lose any of the federal funds because Rod cut state funding? The announcements I read didn't say anything about states having to match funds, but as this governor has failed to match and thus lost other federal funding, I'm not sure how this flu money stands.
Cassandra
· 2 years ago
I noticed that quite a few of the cuts in the state agencies involved personal services and (presumably related) restirement contributions.
Some of these agencies (DHS, DCFS, etc) were getting additional staff in the new budget, so the cuts presumably involve additional staff who will now not be hired.
It's not necessary for the cuts to affect the front lines. The agencies could cut porky management jobs and still hire additional front line staff, even with the personal service cuts. With no pain to the management employees, many of whom are well past eligible for early retirement, which is, believe it or not (rule of 85) still available in Illinois stae government.
Mangement employees are far more likely to have a political sponsor though. The cuts will go to the front lines.
Anonymous
· 2 years ago
Princeville, you're asking the wrong guy. It could be a missed Fed match, or maybe a reaction to the flu shot fiasco...I don't know.
Captain America
· 2 years ago
The Governor's decision to "rob Peter to pay Paul's just makes the Peters angrier than they already were with his "slash and burn," "scorched earth" political strategy. It seems like a "lose-lose situation for the Governor, particularly since he's likely to have to go back to the legislature for a suppleamntal appropriation when the health care money inevitably runs out before the end of the fiscal year.
Anonymous
· 2 years ago
Steve Schnorf, You assume that snatching $465M for your own agenda warrants looking at alternative ways to snatch the money. Making less subjective "cuts" would be easier IF the descriptions of the items was just a little more insightful. For example, experience says that the State Agencies "pad" their budgets in anticipation of budget cuts in the committees, legislature, and governor's office. If you take just a flat cut of 3% across the agencies, you come up with $465M. I took a quick swipe at some of the less "questionable" items and came up with another $17M - left the vague stuff alone at this point. With a little less politics and more fiscal restraint, it could be done and with less backlash.
Anonymous
· 2 years ago
Oh, and that 3% only came from the agency items the Governor reduced, not all of the agencies.
steve schnorf
· 2 years ago
anonymous 5:12,
unless you want to cut grants to agencies serving the disabled and elderly, elementary and secondary school aid, rates to docs serving the poor, etc, you have to cut just the operations budgets, and 3% doesn't get you very much. Then, when you decided to really go looking for real cuts, you found$17m. Congratulations.
I'm assuming nothing about "snatching", I'm just saying you don't get there without making some people and groups unhappy, so you have to choose who you want to p--s off.
My point was making the cuts is never easy if the number's very big. And, almost half the total spending isn't GRF, so you're limited in what you can do with the money.
Anonymous
· 2 years ago
Steve, my feeble attempt at making a point is that the Gov could have taken the wimpy way out and done a .9% reduction across the $58B budget plus a few obvious veto moves and got his $464M. Having done so, everybody would still have gotten a piece of the pie with less pain and little backlash. Maybe the Veteran's Home wouldn't get an 80-bed addition, but would have enough for a 70-bed one - now they got nothin' as a result. Of course, a lot of it is GRF and limited, but the Gov seems unconcerned about being limited...
Anonymous
· 2 years ago
Or, if the Gov had applied his cuts uniformly/categorically rather than with political revenge in mind he would appear more fiscally responsible and taken less criticism for his cuts.
All Comments
Communities with median incomes over twice the national average don't need $1,000,000 worth of goodies from the state Legislature....from us, in other words.
www.ctbaonline.org
It is over $470 million.
I've got an older relative in northern IL who doesn't pay all that much attention to state gov't and political news. But he not only knows about that plane business, he repeats it over and over: "How dare the Governor put himself on that level, far above everyone else's concerns?" And this from a guy who once supported the Governor.
It's incredible that Team Blago doesn't seem to be able to understand this.
But the reality is far more frightening, isn't it?
This guy is not only nuts, he is burning-down-the-house-around-him nuts.
Can he get any uglier? We sadly, have three more years to find out, don't we?
.org/All%2
0Links%20t
o%20Research%20A
reas%20and%20Report
s/Budget,%20Tax%20and
%20Revenue/Governor's%20Veto
%20Analysis%20CTBA.pdf
All%20Links%20to%20Research%
20Areas%20and%20Reports/Budget,%20
Tax%20and%20Revenue/Governor's%20Veto
%20Analysis%20CTBA.pdf
Sorry, that first link didn't work.
http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/
2007/08/30/news/doc46d70a8888638860195472.txt
(presumably related) restirement contributions.
Some of these agencies (DHS, DCFS, etc) were getting additional staff in the new budget, so the cuts presumably involve additional staff who will now not be hired.
It's not necessary for the cuts to affect the front lines. The agencies could cut porky management jobs and still hire additional front line staff, even with the personal service cuts. With no pain to the management employees, many of whom are well past eligible for early retirement, which is, believe it or not (rule of 85) still available in Illinois stae government.
Mangement employees are far more likely to have a political sponsor though. The cuts will go to the
front lines.
unless you want to cut grants to agencies serving the disabled and elderly, elementary and secondary school aid, rates to docs serving the poor, etc, you have to cut just the operations budgets, and 3% doesn't get you very much. Then, when you decided to really go looking for real cuts, you found$17m. Congratulations.
I'm assuming nothing about "snatching", I'm just saying you don't get there without making some people and groups unhappy, so you have to choose who you want to p--s off.
My point was making the cuts is never easy if the number's very big. And, almost half the total spending isn't GRF, so you're limited in what you can do with the money.