“No Room For New Programs with Price Tags”
Many legislators over the last few years talked about being serious about spending cuts as a component of curing the state’s fiscal ills in addition to raising revenues. The revenue part, of course, occurred in January. Now, the heat is on to make certain that the need for cutting was not empty rhetoric, and from the early session vantage point it appears that the legislative leaders and many members are taking that part seriously. Speaker Madigan, for instance, gave an interview recently where he spoke of “spending restraint” to both protect the state’s credit rating and regain the confidence of Illinois citizens. His comments mirrored those of other leaders who appear poised to say “no” to new program initiatives and current program expansions.
One factor that will weigh heavily in the next two months as a state budget is cobbled together is the spending cap that was included in the income tax increase legislation. Because future pension payments must fall within the cap, look for some very difficult decisions that will have to be made in order to meet the cap limits. The spending caps enacted in January were meant to be taken seriously, so much so that the law says that if the Auditor General does mandated reviews of spending levels and determines that the caps were violated, the tax rates fall back to their previous levels. The only other way to avoid that scenario would be to have the Governor declare a budget emergency. However, the law says that to do so both the Treasurer and the Comptroller would have to sign off. Since both are Republicans the popular view is that there would be little chance of that occurring.
The inaugurations are over, the budget address is now history, and the bill introduction deadline has now passed so the legislative session will now be hitting full throttle. The deadlines in each chamber for hearing bills in committee is March 17, so for the next three weeks legislative committees will be grinding out the bills as legislators, and lobbyists, try to keep up with the furious pace of action.
The Senate deadline ended with 2,479 bills being introduced, while House members opted to file 3,636 proposals. About 15%, or possibly less, would reach the Governor’s desk in a good year. But this isn’t a good year, so expect most that even hint at costing anything to be torpedoed.
Since many legislative Democrats feel they are on the hook for raising taxes, look for them to try to be particularly conscientious about justifying expenditures, cutting and acting like adults. To be honest, legislators hate saying no … to constituents and to their colleagues … and their leadership has always been there to make it easy for them to make everyone as happy as possible. But the real world is different than the Shangri-la they’ve become accustomed to. They experienced “round one” of that real world when they had to hike the income tax. They’ll get to experience “round two” this spring. The Speaker has let it be known to his members that he will expect them to take some of the responsibility for determining the budget bottom line, and a lot of rank and file members are going to have a rude awakening. Some, in the past, have criticized the Speaker for being too controlling, expressing a desire for more freedom to make decisions. Be careful what you ask for.
To make the point, Speaker Madigan has introduced House Resolution 110, a resolution that specifies how much money the state will have at its disposal. HR 110 lists each of the state’s revenue sources and eventually will provide the estimates as to how much revenue will be available from each. Right now each line item contains $1, but those lines will be amended to reflect the true estimates as the session progresses. The idea is to determine available resources and then have the House appropriations committees divvy up what’s available, a far cry from how the legislative budget process has worked in the past. It also means that those appropriations committee members are in a position to make some important decisions, especially since there is nowhere near the revenue necessary to make everyone happy. In the past the process of hearing budget bills in the General Assembly has involved splitting them up and hearing half in the House and the other half in the Senate. Not this year. The decision has apparently been made to hear all appropriations in the House first. That puts the focus squarely on the need to look at the budget and spending as a whole.
Obviously, there is no way to predict how this new process will end. In the past the final budget decisions have always been determined at the very end of the session after negotiations between the governor and legislative leaders. That may or may not change. But, in the meantime, it’s a good bet that legislators may get the opportunity to experience their own profiles in courage.
.
Governor’s Budget
State budget deliberations begin and end with the Governor. He proposes, the legislature disposes, and then a meeting of the minds helps create some semblance of a fiscal plan between the end of May (in most cases) and the end of summer (in rare cases). The process begins with the Governor’s annual budget message, and the news was gloomy, at best.
In his short speech the Governor reiterated the need to borrow to pay the current backlog of bills (see next item). He called it “debt restructuring” which it could be, in a very Jekyll and Hyde sort of way, to bring down the current 6-8 month payment cycle. Otherwise, he was very short on specifics. He mentioned a few areas where cuts or reductions would have to be made, some large and some small, and then talked about his vision for Illinois that lasted all of about three minutes.
Even the post speech budget briefings were compacted. All human service agencies were forced to hold their briefings together and each agency director was given a scant three minutes to address those gathered.
What the Governor provided in his budget message were his recommendations. What happens next is that the legislature will place its own imprint on the budget, and shifting of spending priorities and line item amounts are not uncommon. It appears that the state will be going full speed trying to maximize federal matching dollars and limiting program participation to those who are ineligible for Medicaid and changing that emphasis may be difficult. The remainder is probably in play and it is very likely that the squeaky wheels will get the grease.
Borrowing Plan
One of the last actions of the previous General Assembly was to attempt to approve $8.7 billion in borrowing to pay vendors and service providers that have been basically carrying the state’s debt for the last few years. That legislation failed but was reintroduced in the new session as Senate Bill 3. To make this borrowing more palatable and realizable, a portion of the new income tax has been dedicated to paying any bonds issued for this purpose.
Recently, at a joint meeting of the two Senate appropriations committees, sobering news was delivered from the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget about the backlog of unpaid bills, suggesting that even if SB 3 was approved there would still be “hundreds of millions” of dollars still owed. Even worse, in the event that SB 3 fails and no borrowing is approved it was estimated that it would take up to ten years to get the state back to a 60 day payment cycle.
There have been rumblings that some Democratic Senate members who voted for borrowing in January are having second thoughts and have become lukewarm about providing support. Republicans have withheld any support until issues that they hold dear, such as worker’s compensation reform, are addressed. It is expected that some of the GOP issue concerns will be addressed early in the session, so it appears that some approval of the plan could occur in the relatively near future.
Pensions
Another issue that may get another serious look in the next few months is additional pension reform. Last year the General Assembly approved pension reform that impacted newly hired state and local government employees. This year they may take a look at impacting benefits of current employees, but expect a spate of possible lawsuits should they.
Article XIII, Section 5 of the Illinois Constitution contains the following language: “Membership in any pension or retirement system of the State, any unit of local government or school district, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, shall be an enforceable contractual relationship, the benefits of which shall not be diminished or impaired.” The popular interpretation of this section has always been that benefits of state and local government workers are protected from any diminution. Until now, the Chicago Tribune and a few others have argued that there is some legal loophole that could allow the state to make changes. Last week Speaker Madigan suggested that the House may take a look. President Cullerton, in the meantime, said that while he feels that such changes would be constitutionally impermissible, if the House sends a bill over to the Senate there may be some “discussions”. Increasing insurance premiums for current state/local government retirees based on a sliding scale of income may also be gaining some traction.
Pension changes made by the legislature last year will have save the state billions of dollars, but the impact will not be seen for many years. The changes that may be discussed in 2011 will have an immediate impact … depending on which side the Illinois Supreme Court eventually takes.
Also on the “proactive” front, Speaker Madigan has also introduced HJR – Constitutional Amendment #6 that, if approved, will ask voters in 2012 to approve a requirement that a three-fifths vote in the legislature be necessary to approve any future pension benefit increases.
Legislative Turnover
Sen. Brad Burzynski (R-Sycamore) has resigned. His replacement is Christine Johnson, former DeKalb County Treasurer. Sen. Ricky Hendon (D-Chicago) and Sen. Dale Risinger (R-Peoria) have also resigned. Darin LaHood will replace Sen. Risinger. Sen. Hendon’s replacement has not yet been named.
Three Chicago Democratic legislators were victorious on February 22 as they sought local offices. State Rep. Susan Mendoza was elected Chicago City Clerk, and Reps. Will Burns and Harry Osterman were elected aldermen. Each will be sworn in on May 16 and replacements will be named when the vacancies occur.
Redistricting Ready To Begin
The new organizations paid little heed, but a very significant development that will ultimately help impact the political and policy future of Illinois for the next ten years and possibly beyond occurred this week. That “development” was the arrival of the block data from the census bureau that will allow the mapping of new congressional and legislative districts in Illinois. The Census Bureau is mandated to provide this data to the states by the end of March. Its arrival has started the wheels of the process six weeks earlier than expected, and a high state of anxiety will reign over the General Assembly and the Illinois congressional delegation for some weeks to come.
Illinois will be losing one congressional seat, so someone will be losing that games of musical chairs. No telling who, but since the Democrats alone will be drawing you can guess where the speculation is leading.
All General Assembly seats will be up for election in 2012, with each legislator running from what may be a somewhat or completely new district. Those new territories can be friendly or hostile, may create opportunities for primary or general election opposition, or may provide a member with a safe haven. It’s a bit too early to speculate on who may win or lose in the process, but the sale of Tums in the state capitol should be on a major upswing as legislative members potentially see their political futures maintained, enhanced or destroyed by the cartographer’s “pen”.
Congressional districts will be approved by a resolution approved by the General Assembly before the end of the session. Illinois House and Senate districts must be approved by the legislature passing a bill that the Governor approves prior to June 30 (actually May 31). It’s a gut-wrenching process and a highly personal one … and the clock has begun to tick.
Bills of Interest
HB 308 – Rep. Tryon - Provides that beginning January 1, 2012, the Department of Public Health shall issue permits for the construction and modification of closed loop well systems. Provides for the certification and registration of closed loop contractors by the Department. Amends the Water Well and Pump Installation Contractor's License Act to make a technical and a related change. (Current Status: House 2nd Reading)
HB 1585 – Rep. Sente - Provides that "plumbing" includes rainwater harvesting distribution systems, but does not include any rainwater harvesting distribution system or rainwater harvesting collection system unless otherwise required by the Illinois Plumbing Code. Requires the Illinois Department of Public Health to adopt and publish a minimum code of standards for rainwater harvesting collection systems and rainwater harvesting distribution systems by January 1, 2012. Requires rainwater harvesting collection systems and rainwater harvesting distribution systems to be (A) used only for non-potable uses and (B) constructed in accordance with the Illinois Plumbing Code. Defines "rainwater harvesting collection system" and "rainwater harvesting distribution system". (Current Status: House Executive Committee)
HB 1657 – Rep. Bellock - Adds an Illinois congressional delegation member, or his or her designee, to be appointed by the Governor to the Task Force on the Conservation and Quality of the Great Lakes. Provides that no later than June 1 of each year, the Task Force shall submit a report to the General Assembly outlining its recommendations concerning legislative actions to protect the water quality and supply of the Great Lakes. (Current Status: House Environment & Energy Committee)
HB 1660- Rep. Bellock - Creates the Prescription Drug Repository Program Act. Requires the Department of Public Health to establish a prescription drug repository program, under which a healthcare facility may donate a prescription drug or supplies needed to administer a prescription drug for use by an individual who meets eligibility criteria specified by the Department. Sets forth requirements that prescription drugs or supplies must meet in order to be accepted and dispensed under the program. Provides that no drugs or supplies donated under the prescription drug repository program may be resold. Provides that nothing in the Act requires that a pharmacy or pharmacist participate in the prescription drug repository program. Provides for civil and criminal immunity for drug and supply manufacturers and pharmacists in relation to the donation, acceptance, or dispensing of prescription drugs or supplies under the prescription drug repository program. (Current Status: House Health Care Availability and Accessibility Committee)
HB 1704 – Rep. Bradley - . Provides that NPDES permit applications are deemed approved if not approved or denied by the Environmental Protection Agency within 120 days after being filed with the Agency. (Current Status: House Environment & Energy Committee)
HB 2056 – Rep. Osmond - Excludes from the definition of "pollution control facility" the portion of a site or facility used to incinerate only pharmaceuticals from residential sources that are in the possession or control of a law enforcement agency. Authorizes a law enforcement agency to collect pharmaceuticals from residential sources and to incinerate the collected pharmaceuticals in a manner that is consistent with rules adopted by the Agency. Authorizes the Department of State Police to use moneys in the Household Pharmaceutical Disposal Fund to make grants to local law enforcement agencies for the purpose of facilitating the collection and incineration of pharmaceuticals from residential sources. Defines "law enforcement agency". Amends the Unified Code of Corrections. Requires a $20 assessment to be levied against persons who commit specified drug offenses. (Current Status: House Environmental Health Committee)
HB 2879 – Rep. Davis - Provides that inspection fees for all commercial fertilizers and custom mixes shall be $1 per ton (up from 25¢ per ton). Provides that seven-eighths (up from one-half) of the $1 per ton inspection fee shall be paid into the Fertilizer Control Fund. Provides that not less than 50% of the funds appropriated to the fertilizer research and education program shall be used for projects designed to avoid or reduce water pollution that may arise from the use of fertilizer in agriculture. Increases the Fertilizer Research and Education Council members to 15 (up from 9) and provides qualifications for the additional members. (Current Status: House Agriculture & Conservation Committee)
HB 3090 – Rep. Arroyo - Provides that notwithstanding any provision of law, any person who is authorized to dispense prescription drugs in the State must accept, free of charge, expired or unwanted prescription drugs for proper disposal. Provides that the prescription drug dispenser shall make available to its customers or patients a container suitable for use as a receptacle that only permits for the deposit of items and the contents of which are locked and secured for the expired or unwanted prescription drugs. Provides that if a patient or customer is issued a prescription drug from a person who is authorized to dispense prescription drugs in the State and that prescription drug causes an adverse reaction and the patient or customer returns the remainder of the prescription drug to the dispenser, then the dispenser shall refund the full cost of the prescription drug to the patient or customer. (Current Status: House Rules Committee)
HB 3099 – Rep. Tryon - Requires the rules of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Illinois Pollution Control Board to include a process for expediting the issuance of permits and licenses for all projects requiring permitting or licensure. Authorizes the Agency and the Board to engage the experts and additional resources that are reasonably necessary for implementing this process. Specifies that an expedited process applies only upon the request of the applicant and that any additional costs for using the process are to be borne by the applicant. (Current Status: House Rules Committee)
SB 38 – Sen. Garrett/Rep. Sente - Provides that "plumbing" includes rainwater harvesting distribution systems, but does not include any rainwater harvesting distribution system or rainwater harvesting collection system unless otherwise required by the Illinois Plumbing Code. Requires the Illinois Department of Public Health to adopt and publish a minimum code of standards for rainwater harvesting collection systems and rainwater harvesting distribution systems by January 1, 2012. Requires rainwater harvesting collection systems and rainwater harvesting distribution systems to be (A) used only for non-potable uses and (B) constructed in accordance with the Illinois Plumbing Code. Defines "rainwater harvesting collection system" and "rainwater harvesting distribution system". (Current Status: Passed Senate; In House)
SB 1222- Sen. J. Sullivan - Provides that any public water district organized under the Public Water District Act is authorized to construct, maintain, alter, and extend its water main along, upon, under, and across any highway, street, alley, or public ground in the State. (Current Status: Senate Local Government Committee)
SB 1682 – Sen. Link - Requires the Illinois Department of Public Health, by January 1, 2012, to (i) establish standards for the certification and licensing of individuals and contractors constructing and modifying closed loop wells and (ii) issue permits for the construction and modification of closed loop wells. (Current Status: Senate Environment Committee)
SB 1903 – Sen. Clayborne - Provides that NPDES permit applications are deemed approved if not approved or denied by the Environmental Protection Agency within 120 days after being filed with the Agency. (Current Status: Senate Committee on Assignments)
SB 1981 – Sen. Garrett - Authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency to disburse grants from the Illinois Clean Water Fund to other State agencies, local governments, publicly owned entities subject to NPDES permitting requirements, and charitable organizations for the purposes of reducing water pollution and protecting surface and ground water quality and aquatic habitats. Authorizes the Agency to adopt rules to administer this grant program. (Current Status: Senate Committee on Assignments)
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
CONGRESSMAN JOHN SHIMKUS to Address WATERCON Attendees
We are pleased to announce that CONGRESSMAN JOHN SHIMKUS will address the WATERCON attendees during the Fuller Lunch on Wednesday, March 23rd.
John M. Shimkus is serving his 8th term in Congress and represents the 19th District of Illinois, one of the largest geographic districts east of the Mississippi River, stretching from the metro-east region of St. Louis to the state capital in Springfield and down to Metropolis along the Ohio River.
John has served in the Army, as a high school teacher, a county treasurer, and now as a representative in the United States House.
Among his duties in Congress, John serves on the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee. He is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy. In addition, he serves on the Subcommittees on Energy and Power; Health; and Communications and Technology.
John is a U.S. delegate to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. His Lithuanian heritage also allows him to focus on Eastern European issues and highlight the plight of people seeking democracy.
Legislation
Over the years, John has successfully ushered bills through Congress relevant to his district and our nation that were eventually signed into law by Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
• 1998: a law changing our nation’s alternative fuel policy from one of vehicle purchases to actual alternative fuel usage. This legislation has made biodiesel accepted and accessible at fuel pumps.
• 1999: a law designating 9-1-1 as the universal emergency number, including cellular phones.
• 2002: a law increasing federal oversight of automobile tires.
• 2002: a law establishing the www.kids.us Internet domain that provides a safe place on the web for young children to surf and learn without potential predators looming online.
• 2003: a law providing for the placement of heart defibrillators in schools.
• 2004: a law expanding federal grants for the deployment of equipment able to locate 9-1-1 callers from wireless devices.
• 2005: John’s tireless efforts in supporting biodiesel and ethanol were instrumental in the inclusion of the renewable fuel standard in the Energy and Policy Act of 2005.
Family
John married Karen Muth in 1987. They have three sons: David, 17, Joshua, 16, and Daniel, 11. The family maintains their residence in John’s hometown of Collinsville, Illinois. The Shimkus family is active members of Holy Cross Lutheran Church and School in Collinsville.
Education and Work History
John received his Bachelor of Science degree in general engineering from the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, in 1980. He served over five years active duty in the Army, then entered the Army Reserves. John retired with the rank of lieutenant colonel on June 1, 2008, closing out 28 years of military service. He continues his connection to West Point by being an appointed Congressional member of the Academy's Board of Visitors.
After leaving active duty John earned his teaching certificate from Christ College Irvine, California (now Concordia University Irvine). He returned home to teach at Metro East Lutheran High School in Edwardsville, Illinois.
In 1989 John won his first election, becoming a Collinsville Township trustee. He quit his teaching job the following year to campaign full-time and was elected Madison County (Illinois) treasurer. John began studies for his master’s degree in business administration (MBA) while county treasurer and graduated from Southern Illinois University Edwardsville in 1997.
In 1996 John won his first term as a United States Representative from what was Illinois' 20th District. Following redistricting in 2002, he has represented the 19th District.
John has been conferred with honorary doctor of laws degrees from Concordia University Irvine (2004) and Concordia University Nebraska (2005). In 2007 he was presented the Christus Vivit award by Concordia Seminary in St. Louis, Missouri.
John M. Shimkus is serving his 8th term in Congress and represents the 19th District of Illinois, one of the largest geographic districts east of the Mississippi River, stretching from the metro-east region of St. Louis to the state capital in Springfield and down to Metropolis along the Ohio River.
John has served in the Army, as a high school teacher, a county treasurer, and now as a representative in the United States House.
Among his duties in Congress, John serves on the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee. He is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy. In addition, he serves on the Subcommittees on Energy and Power; Health; and Communications and Technology.
John is a U.S. delegate to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. His Lithuanian heritage also allows him to focus on Eastern European issues and highlight the plight of people seeking democracy.
Legislation
Over the years, John has successfully ushered bills through Congress relevant to his district and our nation that were eventually signed into law by Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
• 1998: a law changing our nation’s alternative fuel policy from one of vehicle purchases to actual alternative fuel usage. This legislation has made biodiesel accepted and accessible at fuel pumps.
• 1999: a law designating 9-1-1 as the universal emergency number, including cellular phones.
• 2002: a law increasing federal oversight of automobile tires.
• 2002: a law establishing the www.kids.us Internet domain that provides a safe place on the web for young children to surf and learn without potential predators looming online.
• 2003: a law providing for the placement of heart defibrillators in schools.
• 2004: a law expanding federal grants for the deployment of equipment able to locate 9-1-1 callers from wireless devices.
• 2005: John’s tireless efforts in supporting biodiesel and ethanol were instrumental in the inclusion of the renewable fuel standard in the Energy and Policy Act of 2005.
Family
John married Karen Muth in 1987. They have three sons: David, 17, Joshua, 16, and Daniel, 11. The family maintains their residence in John’s hometown of Collinsville, Illinois. The Shimkus family is active members of Holy Cross Lutheran Church and School in Collinsville.
Education and Work History
John received his Bachelor of Science degree in general engineering from the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, in 1980. He served over five years active duty in the Army, then entered the Army Reserves. John retired with the rank of lieutenant colonel on June 1, 2008, closing out 28 years of military service. He continues his connection to West Point by being an appointed Congressional member of the Academy's Board of Visitors.
After leaving active duty John earned his teaching certificate from Christ College Irvine, California (now Concordia University Irvine). He returned home to teach at Metro East Lutheran High School in Edwardsville, Illinois.
In 1989 John won his first election, becoming a Collinsville Township trustee. He quit his teaching job the following year to campaign full-time and was elected Madison County (Illinois) treasurer. John began studies for his master’s degree in business administration (MBA) while county treasurer and graduated from Southern Illinois University Edwardsville in 1997.
In 1996 John won his first term as a United States Representative from what was Illinois' 20th District. Following redistricting in 2002, he has represented the 19th District.
John has been conferred with honorary doctor of laws degrees from Concordia University Irvine (2004) and Concordia University Nebraska (2005). In 2007 he was presented the Christus Vivit award by Concordia Seminary in St. Louis, Missouri.
Friday, December 3, 2010
A Blizzard or Just A Few Flakes ?
Veto sessions can have a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde personna. Some of those weeks can be calm and unassuming, while others can be rip roaring. This season evidenced both as the uneventful first week gave way to some major policy considerations in the second. Now, all eyes are looking toward January and newly-scheduled January session days that have been announced. The House is now scheduled to be in session from January 3-7 and on January 9, 10 and 11. The Senate has added January 4, 5 and 6 to their schedule. All January dates have been described by leaders as “tentative” but there’s little doubt that most of those days will be utilized. Then, it’s out with the old session and in with the new at high noon on Wednesday, January 12.
The huge unanswered question is whether there will another flurry of activity in January or whether there will be little if any “accumulation”. With the actions of this past week regarding major issues such as police and fire pension reform (approved), civil unions (approved), gaming expansion (passed Senate/needs House action) and medical marijuana (failed) the signs for January are pointing to a continuation of substantial policy considerations. Remember that the rules for enacting bills with immediate effective dates changes on January 1, with the exception of borrowing, to a simple majority (30 Senate, 60 House) allowing the majority party to control the agenda and do pretty much as it wishes, with borrowing a giant exception.
Since his November election was certified Governor Quinn has continued to push for his proposed 1% income tax increase for education. It has been met with resistance from many fronts – many Democratic legislators, including Speaker Madigan, who prefer to see a bipartisan roll call on any revenue enhancements; human services advocates who aren’t feeling the love and would like action to help clear up the severe backlog of state payments to agencies; and Republicans, who are not inclined to vote for new revenue under any circumstances and who demand budget cuts and major policy changes (i.e. Medicaid managed care) to even consider putting votes on bonding or revenue proposals.
There are two urgent items on the January legislative agenda that Democratic leaders must resolve before the new legislative session begins on January 12 – extension of the Emergency Budget Act and the stalled $3.7 billion in bonding authority to pay the state’s pension tab.
At the end of the spring session the legislature approved the Emergency Budget Act giving the governor the power to initiate emergency rules, allowed the governor to modify or terminate state contracts, and provided for interfund borrowing with interest. That law expires on January 9, the day before the governor takes his oath of office so Democrats will want to extend the provisions and they should be able to accomplish that without too much hassle. The borrowing part, however, is another story.
Last May the House approved borrowing $3.7 billion to make the pension payment. Since House Democrats do not have the three-fifths Democratic majority needed to approve it on their own, two Republicans were convinced to cross over and provide the needed votes. The Senate, on the other hand, does have a three-fifths Democratic majority. But, because two of the majority party members are adamantly opposed to borrowing they are going to have to convince one or two Republicans to cross over and provide a vote. So far, no deal.
At the end of the first veto session week President Cullerton created two special committees to study Medicaid reform and worker’s compensation reform. He wants them to report recommendations back no later than January 3 … in time for action to be taken when the legislature meets during that week. Republican Leader Christine Radogno insists there is no quid pro quo, but Democrats are desperate to find those 36 votes for pension borrowing. The first week in January should provide for some interesting watching. Speaker Madigan has mirrored Cullerton’s action and created similar House panels so expect some attempt to forge some wide-ranging agreement.
New Session Schedule
A sliver of a schedule for the new session has been released by the legislative leadership. After the January 12 legislative swearing-in ceremonies the General Assembly will take two weeks off to organize, appoint committees, and prepare for the transaction of legislative business. Regular legislative business and weekly sessions will begin on Tuesday, February 1. The remainder of the spring session schedule will be released in the near future.
During the two January organizing weeks a number of perfunctory sessions are scheduled. No formal business is conducted but these session days allow new bills to be formally introduced and read into the record so they can be assigned to committees and readied for action.
New Members
There have been a few legislative changes that have occurred as a result of the elections.
Sen. Dan Cronin has been replaced by Sen. Ron Sandack. Cronin was elected DuPage County Board Chairman.
Sen. Dan Rutherford has been replaced by Rep. Shane Cultra. Rutherford was elected state treasurer. Rep. Jason Barickman has been appointed to replace Rep. Cultra.
Rep. John Fritchey has resigned to assume his duty as a Cook County Board Commissioner. Rep. Ann Williams is his replacement.
Rep. Bill Black has resigned effective December 31. Representative-elect Chad Hayes will replace him.
Rep. Kevin Joyce resigned during the summer. His replacement, Rep. John M. O’Sullivan, will served until the end of the current session.
Rep. Richard Myers passed away on December 1. His replacement will be named before the end of the year.
A sheet is attached to this report that was compiled by the Illinois Municipal League that provides a background on the new legislators that were elected on November 2.
Campaign Contribution Limits Begin January 1
Illinois has been a wide open state as far as campaign contributions go, until now. Senate Bill 1466, approved in 2009, becomes effective on January 1 and provides limitations, for the first time, on individuals, businesses, unions, associations, and candidate and political action committees. There are limitations on political caucus committees as well, but those limits do not apply in general elections, only primary elections. The new law also makes reporting more rigorous and open.
A great deal of criticism has been levied on the limitation exemption for party caucuses in general elections. There is every expectation that this provision will not be changed and will remain as is, at least for the foreseeable future.
A separate chart has been attached to this report that provides a breakdown and synopsis of the requirements of the new Act.
Newly elected legislators
SB1466 Campaign Finance Reform Synopsis
The huge unanswered question is whether there will another flurry of activity in January or whether there will be little if any “accumulation”. With the actions of this past week regarding major issues such as police and fire pension reform (approved), civil unions (approved), gaming expansion (passed Senate/needs House action) and medical marijuana (failed) the signs for January are pointing to a continuation of substantial policy considerations. Remember that the rules for enacting bills with immediate effective dates changes on January 1, with the exception of borrowing, to a simple majority (30 Senate, 60 House) allowing the majority party to control the agenda and do pretty much as it wishes, with borrowing a giant exception.
Since his November election was certified Governor Quinn has continued to push for his proposed 1% income tax increase for education. It has been met with resistance from many fronts – many Democratic legislators, including Speaker Madigan, who prefer to see a bipartisan roll call on any revenue enhancements; human services advocates who aren’t feeling the love and would like action to help clear up the severe backlog of state payments to agencies; and Republicans, who are not inclined to vote for new revenue under any circumstances and who demand budget cuts and major policy changes (i.e. Medicaid managed care) to even consider putting votes on bonding or revenue proposals.
There are two urgent items on the January legislative agenda that Democratic leaders must resolve before the new legislative session begins on January 12 – extension of the Emergency Budget Act and the stalled $3.7 billion in bonding authority to pay the state’s pension tab.
At the end of the spring session the legislature approved the Emergency Budget Act giving the governor the power to initiate emergency rules, allowed the governor to modify or terminate state contracts, and provided for interfund borrowing with interest. That law expires on January 9, the day before the governor takes his oath of office so Democrats will want to extend the provisions and they should be able to accomplish that without too much hassle. The borrowing part, however, is another story.
Last May the House approved borrowing $3.7 billion to make the pension payment. Since House Democrats do not have the three-fifths Democratic majority needed to approve it on their own, two Republicans were convinced to cross over and provide the needed votes. The Senate, on the other hand, does have a three-fifths Democratic majority. But, because two of the majority party members are adamantly opposed to borrowing they are going to have to convince one or two Republicans to cross over and provide a vote. So far, no deal.
At the end of the first veto session week President Cullerton created two special committees to study Medicaid reform and worker’s compensation reform. He wants them to report recommendations back no later than January 3 … in time for action to be taken when the legislature meets during that week. Republican Leader Christine Radogno insists there is no quid pro quo, but Democrats are desperate to find those 36 votes for pension borrowing. The first week in January should provide for some interesting watching. Speaker Madigan has mirrored Cullerton’s action and created similar House panels so expect some attempt to forge some wide-ranging agreement.
New Session Schedule
A sliver of a schedule for the new session has been released by the legislative leadership. After the January 12 legislative swearing-in ceremonies the General Assembly will take two weeks off to organize, appoint committees, and prepare for the transaction of legislative business. Regular legislative business and weekly sessions will begin on Tuesday, February 1. The remainder of the spring session schedule will be released in the near future.
During the two January organizing weeks a number of perfunctory sessions are scheduled. No formal business is conducted but these session days allow new bills to be formally introduced and read into the record so they can be assigned to committees and readied for action.
New Members
There have been a few legislative changes that have occurred as a result of the elections.
Sen. Dan Cronin has been replaced by Sen. Ron Sandack. Cronin was elected DuPage County Board Chairman.
Sen. Dan Rutherford has been replaced by Rep. Shane Cultra. Rutherford was elected state treasurer. Rep. Jason Barickman has been appointed to replace Rep. Cultra.
Rep. John Fritchey has resigned to assume his duty as a Cook County Board Commissioner. Rep. Ann Williams is his replacement.
Rep. Bill Black has resigned effective December 31. Representative-elect Chad Hayes will replace him.
Rep. Kevin Joyce resigned during the summer. His replacement, Rep. John M. O’Sullivan, will served until the end of the current session.
Rep. Richard Myers passed away on December 1. His replacement will be named before the end of the year.
A sheet is attached to this report that was compiled by the Illinois Municipal League that provides a background on the new legislators that were elected on November 2.
Campaign Contribution Limits Begin January 1
Illinois has been a wide open state as far as campaign contributions go, until now. Senate Bill 1466, approved in 2009, becomes effective on January 1 and provides limitations, for the first time, on individuals, businesses, unions, associations, and candidate and political action committees. There are limitations on political caucus committees as well, but those limits do not apply in general elections, only primary elections. The new law also makes reporting more rigorous and open.
A great deal of criticism has been levied on the limitation exemption for party caucuses in general elections. There is every expectation that this provision will not be changed and will remain as is, at least for the foreseeable future.
A separate chart has been attached to this report that provides a breakdown and synopsis of the requirements of the new Act.
Newly elected legislators
SB1466 Campaign Finance Reform Synopsis
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
All Politics is Local - review of election results
Reviewing the results of Election 2010 in Illinois it is striking to see how much the adage, “all politics is local” comes into play. Yes, there was the GOP wave that will send a number of new faces to far-off Washington, D.C. But when it came to local “backyard” races there was only moderate change and no apparently no shift in the balance of power in Springfield with Governor Quinn apparently on the verge of eking out a pint-sized victory and Democrats maintaining majorities in both the Illinois Senate and House. There was some shrinkage in the size of the majorities but when the dust settled each leader retained a comfortable margin.
A Walkoff for Quinn?
The Governor’s race, still unresolved, had to be the biggest surprise of the night. In baseball jargon, the new term for a home run hit in the bottom of the ninth inning to win a game is called a “walkoff”. Quinn may have done the political equivalent on Tuesday.
Since last summer practically every poll showed Quinn behind, albeit in a close race, including the last round of polls that were published last weekend. Whether it was President Obama’s visit to Chicago that motivated Democrats, or just a last minute decision by some voters to become participants, Quinn apparently has been able to “slide into home” safely. During the last primary election Quinn appeared on the ropes and his ability to “close” earned him a win. It appears that lightening may have struck twice.
Legislative Rundown
Initial results show that the Democratic majority in the Illinois Senate will drop from 37 to 35 … a result much better than expected just a few weeks ago when the GOP thought that they might be able to wrestle the majority. That would have been a long shot, at best. What did, however, look doable was a possible Republican takeover of the Illinois House where over 20 seats were heavily contested and where 12 were needed to flip the majority. In a year that everyone thought was reminiscent of 1994 when that turnover actually did happen, it didn’t. Democrats were prepared and, while they will lose six seats, they have maintained a very workable majority of 64.
The following lists the targeted districts in each chamber and the winners and losers. Districts that turned over from one party to the other are noted in green.
Senate Targeted Races By District (7): Net Democratic loss – 2 seats
10th –Sen John Mulroe (D) def. Brian Doherty (R) (DeLeo (D) vacancy) – Chicago Northwest
22nd – Sen. Michael Noland (D) def. Steven Rauschenberger (R) – Elgin area
31st –Suzi Schmidt (R) def. Sen. Michael Bond (D) – Waukegan area
40tg – Sen. Toi Hutchinson (D) def.. Adam Baumgartner (R) – Southern Cook/Northern Will
43rd – Sen. A.J. Wilhelmi (D) def. Cedra Crenshaw (R) – Joliet area
49th –William “Sam” McCann (R) def. Sen. Deanna DeMuzio (D) . – Carlinville area
52nd – Sen. Michael Frerichs (D) def. Al Reynolds (R) – Champaign/Danville area
House Targeted Races By District (21): Net Democratic loss – 6 seats
17th – Daniel Biss (D) def. Hamilton Cheng (R) (Coulson (R) seat) – Northern Cook County – Wilmette/Evanston area
36th – Kelly Burke (D) def. Richard Grabowski (R) (Brosnahan seat) – South Cook County – Oak Lawn area
37th - Rep. Kevin McCarthy (D) def. Jeffrey Junkas (R) – Southwest Cook County - Tinley Park/Orland Park area
43rd – Rep. Keith Farnham (D) def. Ruth Munson (R) – Elgin area
44th – Rep. Fred Crespo (D) def. Billie Roth (R) – Northwest Cook County – Streamwood/Hoffman Estates area
56th – Michelle Mussman def. Ryan Higgins (R) (Froehlich seat) - Northwest Cook County – Schaumburg area
58th– Rep. Karen May (D) def. Lauren Turelli (R) – Lake County – Highland Park area
59th – Rep. Carol Sente (D) def. Danile Sugrue (R) – Lake County – Vernon Hills/Buffalo Grove area
66th – David Harris (R) def. Rep. Mark Walker (D) – Northwest Cook County – Arlington Heights/Mt. Prospect area
69th Joe Sosnowski (R) def. Ray Pendzinski (D) and Daniel Lindsey (Green) (Wait (R) seat) – Rockford/Belvidere area
71st – Richard Morthland (R) def. Dennis Ahern (D) (Boland (D) seat) – Moline area
75th – Sue Resin (R) def. Rep. Careen Gordon D) – Morris area
79th – Rep. Lisa Dugan (D) def.. Nick Been (R) and George Ochsenfeld (Green) – Will County – Bradley/Bourbonnais area
85th – Rep. Emily McAsey (D) def. Maripat Oliver (R) – Will County – Lockport/Bolingbrook area
91th – Michael Unes (R) def. Rep. Mike Smith (D) – Canton/East Peoria area
92nd – Rep. Jehan Gordon (D) def. Jim Montelongo (R) – Peoria area
98th – Wayne Rosenthal (R) def. Charles Landers (D) v. (Hannig (D) seat) – South Central Illinois
101st – Adam Brown (R) def. Rep. Bob Flider (D) – Decatur area
102nd – Rep. Ron Stephens (R) v. Deena Dailey (D) – Southwest Illinois – Troy/Greenville area
104th – Chad Hays (R) def. Michael Puhr (D) (Black (R) seat) – Danville area
112th – Dwight Kay (R) def. Rep. Jay Hoffman (D).– Southwest Illinois – Collinsville area
Probably the most surprising legislative result of the night was Sen. Michael Noland’s re-election defeat of former state Sen. Steven Rauschenberger. Noland was given practically zero chance to win in a”wave” year, having cast some fairly controversial votes during his four-year term and running against a former very popular, “unbeatable” incumbent. Noland has had a reputation as a hard charging, indefatigable candidate. He proved it this year.
JCAR
The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) provides an important function by reviewing and approving all state agency rules. Membership on JCAR is made up of twelve legislators, with three from each legislative caucus serving. There is a total of six members from each political party so committee decisions are bipartisan. JCAR membership doesn’t change much from year to year so it is surprising that one-third of its membership will change in 2011 as a result of the election. Sen. Randy Hultgren (R) was elected to Congress, Sen. Dan Rutherford (R) was elected State Treasurer, Rep. John Fritchey was elected to the Cook County Board of Commissioners, and Rep. David Miller lost his bid for Comptroller. Replacements will be made by the respective legislative leaders.
Where Do We Go From Here?
How to balance a $15 billion budget will be the critical focus of the governor and the legislature during the next two, and possibly more, budget cycles. Will there be a more realistic opportunity for that to occur if Quinn does win? Probably, but that presumes that Quinn can get his leadership act together and be the adult in the room with the capacity to say no and to marshal his legislative forces. A Brady victory could make these decisions more difficult because if there was some realization after he assumed office that new revenue would be necessary Democrats would require that he get votes from GOP legislators, and that will be a herculean, if not impossible task.
What about the veto session? Will there be major decisions made in the waning days and hours of this General Assembly? Democratic legislative leaders will have to assess their prerogatives and determine whether there is any value in allowing the new legislature to begin with a clean slate. Major veto session decisions are not often easy because some losers and retirees lose their enthusiasm and may not even be in attendance. So, if there are going to be major undertakings in the next few months there will have to be a full court press to make sure that everyone is committed and that might be excruciatingly frustrating.
Will budget decisions in the legislature become more bipartisan next year? Also possible. But Democrats are going to have to let Republicans into the process, and Republicans are going to have to show a willingness to work toward solutions. When Governors Thompson and Edgar faced budget problems there was a willingness from both sides to find both a solution and the requisite votes to enact them. That has not been the case of late, and to cure the Illinois budget woes it’s going to demand bipartisanship.
A potential Quinn win, coupled with the Democratic legislative majorities and Supreme Court Justice Kilbride’s successful retention will allow the Democrats to become the first political party since the adoption of the 1970 Illinois Constitution to control the redistricting process from the beginning. Reapportionment had been a major underlying issue for the last two election cycles and will generally determine control of the General Assembly for the next ten years. Will the fact that reapportionment decisions have now become a fait accompli (if Quinn’s win is confirmed) cause legislative debate to become more tempered? That, too, is a possibility, although the odds may be long.
A Walkoff for Quinn?
The Governor’s race, still unresolved, had to be the biggest surprise of the night. In baseball jargon, the new term for a home run hit in the bottom of the ninth inning to win a game is called a “walkoff”. Quinn may have done the political equivalent on Tuesday.
Since last summer practically every poll showed Quinn behind, albeit in a close race, including the last round of polls that were published last weekend. Whether it was President Obama’s visit to Chicago that motivated Democrats, or just a last minute decision by some voters to become participants, Quinn apparently has been able to “slide into home” safely. During the last primary election Quinn appeared on the ropes and his ability to “close” earned him a win. It appears that lightening may have struck twice.
Legislative Rundown
Initial results show that the Democratic majority in the Illinois Senate will drop from 37 to 35 … a result much better than expected just a few weeks ago when the GOP thought that they might be able to wrestle the majority. That would have been a long shot, at best. What did, however, look doable was a possible Republican takeover of the Illinois House where over 20 seats were heavily contested and where 12 were needed to flip the majority. In a year that everyone thought was reminiscent of 1994 when that turnover actually did happen, it didn’t. Democrats were prepared and, while they will lose six seats, they have maintained a very workable majority of 64.
The following lists the targeted districts in each chamber and the winners and losers. Districts that turned over from one party to the other are noted in green.
Senate Targeted Races By District (7): Net Democratic loss – 2 seats
10th –Sen John Mulroe (D) def. Brian Doherty (R) (DeLeo (D) vacancy) – Chicago Northwest
22nd – Sen. Michael Noland (D) def. Steven Rauschenberger (R) – Elgin area
31st –Suzi Schmidt (R) def. Sen. Michael Bond (D) – Waukegan area
40tg – Sen. Toi Hutchinson (D) def.. Adam Baumgartner (R) – Southern Cook/Northern Will
43rd – Sen. A.J. Wilhelmi (D) def. Cedra Crenshaw (R) – Joliet area
49th –William “Sam” McCann (R) def. Sen. Deanna DeMuzio (D) . – Carlinville area
52nd – Sen. Michael Frerichs (D) def. Al Reynolds (R) – Champaign/Danville area
House Targeted Races By District (21): Net Democratic loss – 6 seats
17th – Daniel Biss (D) def. Hamilton Cheng (R) (Coulson (R) seat) – Northern Cook County – Wilmette/Evanston area
36th – Kelly Burke (D) def. Richard Grabowski (R) (Brosnahan seat) – South Cook County – Oak Lawn area
37th - Rep. Kevin McCarthy (D) def. Jeffrey Junkas (R) – Southwest Cook County - Tinley Park/Orland Park area
43rd – Rep. Keith Farnham (D) def. Ruth Munson (R) – Elgin area
44th – Rep. Fred Crespo (D) def. Billie Roth (R) – Northwest Cook County – Streamwood/Hoffman Estates area
56th – Michelle Mussman def. Ryan Higgins (R) (Froehlich seat) - Northwest Cook County – Schaumburg area
58th– Rep. Karen May (D) def. Lauren Turelli (R) – Lake County – Highland Park area
59th – Rep. Carol Sente (D) def. Danile Sugrue (R) – Lake County – Vernon Hills/Buffalo Grove area
66th – David Harris (R) def. Rep. Mark Walker (D) – Northwest Cook County – Arlington Heights/Mt. Prospect area
69th Joe Sosnowski (R) def. Ray Pendzinski (D) and Daniel Lindsey (Green) (Wait (R) seat) – Rockford/Belvidere area
71st – Richard Morthland (R) def. Dennis Ahern (D) (Boland (D) seat) – Moline area
75th – Sue Resin (R) def. Rep. Careen Gordon D) – Morris area
79th – Rep. Lisa Dugan (D) def.. Nick Been (R) and George Ochsenfeld (Green) – Will County – Bradley/Bourbonnais area
85th – Rep. Emily McAsey (D) def. Maripat Oliver (R) – Will County – Lockport/Bolingbrook area
91th – Michael Unes (R) def. Rep. Mike Smith (D) – Canton/East Peoria area
92nd – Rep. Jehan Gordon (D) def. Jim Montelongo (R) – Peoria area
98th – Wayne Rosenthal (R) def. Charles Landers (D) v. (Hannig (D) seat) – South Central Illinois
101st – Adam Brown (R) def. Rep. Bob Flider (D) – Decatur area
102nd – Rep. Ron Stephens (R) v. Deena Dailey (D) – Southwest Illinois – Troy/Greenville area
104th – Chad Hays (R) def. Michael Puhr (D) (Black (R) seat) – Danville area
112th – Dwight Kay (R) def. Rep. Jay Hoffman (D).– Southwest Illinois – Collinsville area
Probably the most surprising legislative result of the night was Sen. Michael Noland’s re-election defeat of former state Sen. Steven Rauschenberger. Noland was given practically zero chance to win in a”wave” year, having cast some fairly controversial votes during his four-year term and running against a former very popular, “unbeatable” incumbent. Noland has had a reputation as a hard charging, indefatigable candidate. He proved it this year.
JCAR
The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) provides an important function by reviewing and approving all state agency rules. Membership on JCAR is made up of twelve legislators, with three from each legislative caucus serving. There is a total of six members from each political party so committee decisions are bipartisan. JCAR membership doesn’t change much from year to year so it is surprising that one-third of its membership will change in 2011 as a result of the election. Sen. Randy Hultgren (R) was elected to Congress, Sen. Dan Rutherford (R) was elected State Treasurer, Rep. John Fritchey was elected to the Cook County Board of Commissioners, and Rep. David Miller lost his bid for Comptroller. Replacements will be made by the respective legislative leaders.
Where Do We Go From Here?
How to balance a $15 billion budget will be the critical focus of the governor and the legislature during the next two, and possibly more, budget cycles. Will there be a more realistic opportunity for that to occur if Quinn does win? Probably, but that presumes that Quinn can get his leadership act together and be the adult in the room with the capacity to say no and to marshal his legislative forces. A Brady victory could make these decisions more difficult because if there was some realization after he assumed office that new revenue would be necessary Democrats would require that he get votes from GOP legislators, and that will be a herculean, if not impossible task.
What about the veto session? Will there be major decisions made in the waning days and hours of this General Assembly? Democratic legislative leaders will have to assess their prerogatives and determine whether there is any value in allowing the new legislature to begin with a clean slate. Major veto session decisions are not often easy because some losers and retirees lose their enthusiasm and may not even be in attendance. So, if there are going to be major undertakings in the next few months there will have to be a full court press to make sure that everyone is committed and that might be excruciatingly frustrating.
Will budget decisions in the legislature become more bipartisan next year? Also possible. But Democrats are going to have to let Republicans into the process, and Republicans are going to have to show a willingness to work toward solutions. When Governors Thompson and Edgar faced budget problems there was a willingness from both sides to find both a solution and the requisite votes to enact them. That has not been the case of late, and to cure the Illinois budget woes it’s going to demand bipartisanship.
A potential Quinn win, coupled with the Democratic legislative majorities and Supreme Court Justice Kilbride’s successful retention will allow the Democrats to become the first political party since the adoption of the 1970 Illinois Constitution to control the redistricting process from the beginning. Reapportionment had been a major underlying issue for the last two election cycles and will generally determine control of the General Assembly for the next ten years. Will the fact that reapportionment decisions have now become a fait accompli (if Quinn’s win is confirmed) cause legislative debate to become more tempered? That, too, is a possibility, although the odds may be long.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
And The Winner Is …. ?
After all the months political debates, charges, countercharges, and millions of dollars spent on television, radio and mail to convince voters that their opponents are worse than they are, Election 2010 will mercifully draw to a close in two days. By the end of the day on November 2 we should have some idea as to what the next two years, and possibly the next decade, hold politically and governmentally in the state of Illinois.
Democrats want to keep the governor’s office and majorities in the legislature so they can control state policy for the next two years, but also draw the reapportionment map that could put them in legislative control for the next ten. Republicans, on the other hand, feel emboldened and have put on a full frontal assault hoping to capture the governor’s office and possibly into a majority in the House. Either one would give them a 50/50 chance to control the reapportionment process that will begin in the spring.
With literally hours to go in the governor’s race it appears that the race is in a virtual dead heat. The number of targeted legislative races has expanded over the last few weeks so there are as many as 30 house districts being contested along with a dozen or so senate seats. The contested legislative seats are not focused in any one area so observers are going to have to wait for local returns from almost every area of the state. That should make for a long night on Tuesday as results trickle in.
The magic numbers for Tuesday night are 60 and 30. Those are the numbers that a party will need to control each of the legislative chambers. Sixty members of one party control the House and 30 control the Senate. Will Democrats be able to withstand the expected GOP/Tea Party onslaught? Have they been able to create a game plan that will offer different result than in 1994 when Republicans ran the table and captured every state office and control of the legislature? What happens if there is a 59-59 tie in the House? (Quick answer: Very ugly and gridlocked paralysis for two years.) Tune in Tuesday night …
For those who wish to follow the status of the legislative elections during Tuesday night, you might try www.capitalfaxblog. They may have compiled reports from the field that will provide the status of many legislative races, and all in one place.
Lame Ducks
Prior to every post-election season legislative session speculation abounds regarding major policy enactments by the General Assembly with lame duck legislators providing the necessary votes. In reality, such major policy decisions seldom occur.
Lame ducks can be classified in two categories: 1) Retired/defeated and committed, and 2) Retired/defeated and uncommitted.
The first category is comprised of legislators who feel a deep affinity for the legislative process and who feel that it is their responsibility to participate fully in the process until the final session gavel comes down. Most soon-to-be former legislators fit into this category. The second category is generally comprised of a few who may have retired because they looked upon the process as a burden or who are angry because they were “rejected” by their constituents in their reelection efforts. Their commitment to seeing the process through to the end is questionable.
Putting together the votes for a major initiative in the yearly veto session requires an extraordinary number of votes for it to be effective immediately. Generally, committed legislators who will not be returning, by and large, stay true to their philosophies and generally will not cross over and breach their principles. Additionally, some in this category may have plans to run for office again so it is even more unlikely that they will cast an odd vote. On the other hand, the few uncommitted legislators may not even be counted on to be in Springfield during post-election session days, let alone counting on a vote or convincing them to vote on a major piece of legislation.
What all this suggests is that putting together a successful roll call to enact a major initiative, such as a tax increase, is not an easy task. Can it happen? Surely. However, it’s never easy as the lack of such successful efforts in the past can attest.
Disorder in the Court?
One of the important results to watch on election night will be the effort to unseat Supreme Court Justice Thomas Kilbride. Democrats currently hold and traditionally have held a 4-3 majority on the Illinois Supreme Court. In the past the four Democratic votes have come from the three Cook County justices along with the justice elected from southern Illinois. In the past ten years two upsets have occurred that skewed this formula. In 2004 a Republican, Lloyd Karmeier, was elected from the southern Illinois district and in 2000 Democrat Thomas Kilbride was elected from the normally Republican 3rd District that stretches from Will County to Rock Island. Illinois supreme court justices serve for ten years and then appear on a retention ballot. They must receive 60 percent approval to be retained. It’s Justice Kilbride’s turn at bat in 2010 and it’s been a battle royale.
Why? The simple answer is caps on malpractice awards. Twice in the last forty years the legislature has approved malpractice award caps and twice, most recently last February, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled those caps unconstitutional with a four-vote majority. Change one vote and the possibility of major policy change in Illinois becomes possible. Enter Kilbride and his retention effort. The pro-caps, anti-Kilbride groups are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to deny him retention and have been brutal in their representation of his record. Kilbride has countered by presenting testimonials from a bipartisan broad cross-section of prominent persons touting his record. Remember that judicial elections aren’t generally issue-oriented -- judicial candidates are forbidden to be specific on how they would rule on specific issues or cases so races become focused more on background, values and trust.
A possible GOP Supreme Court majority also puts them in a position to rule on the state legislative reapportionment case when it arrives there, as it always does, sometime in mid-to-late 2011. The results in the gubernatorial and legislative races will be the first step in the remap process. The Illinois Supreme Court is the last, final and most important step, especially since they could discard any map presented to it and rule for another. That map will determine the legislative politics in Illinois for the next ten years. So keep an eye on this race Tuesday night. The impact could significantly impact the Illinois governmental and political landscape for years.
Who’s Next?
One of the major and sometimes overriding factors that determine the nature of the General Assembly’s fiscal and policy decisions is the city of Chicago, and the actions of its legislative delegation are very much dictated by leadership philosophy and the perceived needs of the person sitting in the mayor’s chair. In 2011 there may be a void in the direction that the city delegation is given due to the announced retirement of Mayor Richard M. Daley. Not only has his early retirement announcement created a scramble for the legion of mayors-in-waiting who wish to succeed him, but it may also create a rudderless legislative delegation searching for direction at a time when the state and city both are struggling financially.
According to the 2011 election calendar, mayoral candidates must file their petitions no later than November 22. Even though candidates will have a week to withdraw, and some will, it will provide a good glimpse of the expected large number of individuals who want to try to grab for this possible once-in-a-generation ‘brass ring’. The non-partisan primary election is scheduled to be held on February 22. If no candidate receives 50 percent then the top two will face off on April 5. The winner will take office on May 16 … while the General Assembly session adjournment date is May 31, only two weeks later.
If there is a sure winner on February 22 then there probably would be some consultation and coordination between the current and incoming administrations and the Chicago delegation. With the large number of candidates expected to run, however, it is widely expected that April 5 will be the date that the next mayor is elected. Not much time will remain for the new administration to get its priorities in order and its delegation marching in sync.
The needs and desires of the City of Chicago are not always the preeminent factor in legislative deliberation and they don’t always get what they want. But, like it or not, they are a very large delegation and a factor, and sometimes a very large factor, in determining the direction of the state and whoever is mayor helps to set that direction. In 2011, however, it may be one big delegation in search of a leader.
Veto Session (And Other) Dates Reminder
The Senate will be meeting on November 4 for the purpose of considering additional borrowing. It is not a “special session” but rather a session that was “recessed” when the legislature left Springfield in May. Therefore, the subject matter is not limited but it is not expected that anything out of the ordinary will take place.
The legislature is scheduled to meet the week before (November 16, 17, 18) and the week after (November 29, 30 and December 1) Thanksgiving to conduct its annual veto session. The governor vetoed or amendatory vetoed very little so there is some possibility that the number of session days may be cut. Of course, it also leaves time to act on other issues that may be outstanding.
Also expect at least a short legislative session in January. A governor will be sworn in on Monday, January 10. The legislature will probably meet that day and the next, wrapping up the current session before the new General Assembly is sworn into office on January 12. The January session days could be significant because as of January 1, the number of votes necessary to pass a bill and have it effective immediately drops from a three-fifths (36 Senate/71 House) to a simple majority (30/60).
Democrats want to keep the governor’s office and majorities in the legislature so they can control state policy for the next two years, but also draw the reapportionment map that could put them in legislative control for the next ten. Republicans, on the other hand, feel emboldened and have put on a full frontal assault hoping to capture the governor’s office and possibly into a majority in the House. Either one would give them a 50/50 chance to control the reapportionment process that will begin in the spring.
With literally hours to go in the governor’s race it appears that the race is in a virtual dead heat. The number of targeted legislative races has expanded over the last few weeks so there are as many as 30 house districts being contested along with a dozen or so senate seats. The contested legislative seats are not focused in any one area so observers are going to have to wait for local returns from almost every area of the state. That should make for a long night on Tuesday as results trickle in.
The magic numbers for Tuesday night are 60 and 30. Those are the numbers that a party will need to control each of the legislative chambers. Sixty members of one party control the House and 30 control the Senate. Will Democrats be able to withstand the expected GOP/Tea Party onslaught? Have they been able to create a game plan that will offer different result than in 1994 when Republicans ran the table and captured every state office and control of the legislature? What happens if there is a 59-59 tie in the House? (Quick answer: Very ugly and gridlocked paralysis for two years.) Tune in Tuesday night …
For those who wish to follow the status of the legislative elections during Tuesday night, you might try www.capitalfaxblog. They may have compiled reports from the field that will provide the status of many legislative races, and all in one place.
Lame Ducks
Prior to every post-election season legislative session speculation abounds regarding major policy enactments by the General Assembly with lame duck legislators providing the necessary votes. In reality, such major policy decisions seldom occur.
Lame ducks can be classified in two categories: 1) Retired/defeated and committed, and 2) Retired/defeated and uncommitted.
The first category is comprised of legislators who feel a deep affinity for the legislative process and who feel that it is their responsibility to participate fully in the process until the final session gavel comes down. Most soon-to-be former legislators fit into this category. The second category is generally comprised of a few who may have retired because they looked upon the process as a burden or who are angry because they were “rejected” by their constituents in their reelection efforts. Their commitment to seeing the process through to the end is questionable.
Putting together the votes for a major initiative in the yearly veto session requires an extraordinary number of votes for it to be effective immediately. Generally, committed legislators who will not be returning, by and large, stay true to their philosophies and generally will not cross over and breach their principles. Additionally, some in this category may have plans to run for office again so it is even more unlikely that they will cast an odd vote. On the other hand, the few uncommitted legislators may not even be counted on to be in Springfield during post-election session days, let alone counting on a vote or convincing them to vote on a major piece of legislation.
What all this suggests is that putting together a successful roll call to enact a major initiative, such as a tax increase, is not an easy task. Can it happen? Surely. However, it’s never easy as the lack of such successful efforts in the past can attest.
Disorder in the Court?
One of the important results to watch on election night will be the effort to unseat Supreme Court Justice Thomas Kilbride. Democrats currently hold and traditionally have held a 4-3 majority on the Illinois Supreme Court. In the past the four Democratic votes have come from the three Cook County justices along with the justice elected from southern Illinois. In the past ten years two upsets have occurred that skewed this formula. In 2004 a Republican, Lloyd Karmeier, was elected from the southern Illinois district and in 2000 Democrat Thomas Kilbride was elected from the normally Republican 3rd District that stretches from Will County to Rock Island. Illinois supreme court justices serve for ten years and then appear on a retention ballot. They must receive 60 percent approval to be retained. It’s Justice Kilbride’s turn at bat in 2010 and it’s been a battle royale.
Why? The simple answer is caps on malpractice awards. Twice in the last forty years the legislature has approved malpractice award caps and twice, most recently last February, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled those caps unconstitutional with a four-vote majority. Change one vote and the possibility of major policy change in Illinois becomes possible. Enter Kilbride and his retention effort. The pro-caps, anti-Kilbride groups are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to deny him retention and have been brutal in their representation of his record. Kilbride has countered by presenting testimonials from a bipartisan broad cross-section of prominent persons touting his record. Remember that judicial elections aren’t generally issue-oriented -- judicial candidates are forbidden to be specific on how they would rule on specific issues or cases so races become focused more on background, values and trust.
A possible GOP Supreme Court majority also puts them in a position to rule on the state legislative reapportionment case when it arrives there, as it always does, sometime in mid-to-late 2011. The results in the gubernatorial and legislative races will be the first step in the remap process. The Illinois Supreme Court is the last, final and most important step, especially since they could discard any map presented to it and rule for another. That map will determine the legislative politics in Illinois for the next ten years. So keep an eye on this race Tuesday night. The impact could significantly impact the Illinois governmental and political landscape for years.
Who’s Next?
One of the major and sometimes overriding factors that determine the nature of the General Assembly’s fiscal and policy decisions is the city of Chicago, and the actions of its legislative delegation are very much dictated by leadership philosophy and the perceived needs of the person sitting in the mayor’s chair. In 2011 there may be a void in the direction that the city delegation is given due to the announced retirement of Mayor Richard M. Daley. Not only has his early retirement announcement created a scramble for the legion of mayors-in-waiting who wish to succeed him, but it may also create a rudderless legislative delegation searching for direction at a time when the state and city both are struggling financially.
According to the 2011 election calendar, mayoral candidates must file their petitions no later than November 22. Even though candidates will have a week to withdraw, and some will, it will provide a good glimpse of the expected large number of individuals who want to try to grab for this possible once-in-a-generation ‘brass ring’. The non-partisan primary election is scheduled to be held on February 22. If no candidate receives 50 percent then the top two will face off on April 5. The winner will take office on May 16 … while the General Assembly session adjournment date is May 31, only two weeks later.
If there is a sure winner on February 22 then there probably would be some consultation and coordination between the current and incoming administrations and the Chicago delegation. With the large number of candidates expected to run, however, it is widely expected that April 5 will be the date that the next mayor is elected. Not much time will remain for the new administration to get its priorities in order and its delegation marching in sync.
The needs and desires of the City of Chicago are not always the preeminent factor in legislative deliberation and they don’t always get what they want. But, like it or not, they are a very large delegation and a factor, and sometimes a very large factor, in determining the direction of the state and whoever is mayor helps to set that direction. In 2011, however, it may be one big delegation in search of a leader.
Veto Session (And Other) Dates Reminder
The Senate will be meeting on November 4 for the purpose of considering additional borrowing. It is not a “special session” but rather a session that was “recessed” when the legislature left Springfield in May. Therefore, the subject matter is not limited but it is not expected that anything out of the ordinary will take place.
The legislature is scheduled to meet the week before (November 16, 17, 18) and the week after (November 29, 30 and December 1) Thanksgiving to conduct its annual veto session. The governor vetoed or amendatory vetoed very little so there is some possibility that the number of session days may be cut. Of course, it also leaves time to act on other issues that may be outstanding.
Also expect at least a short legislative session in January. A governor will be sworn in on Monday, January 10. The legislature will probably meet that day and the next, wrapping up the current session before the new General Assembly is sworn into office on January 12. The January session days could be significant because as of January 1, the number of votes necessary to pass a bill and have it effective immediately drops from a three-fifths (36 Senate/71 House) to a simple majority (30/60).
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
ILLINOIS REGISTER ILLINOIS EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PROPOSED RULES
1) Heading of the Part: Licensing of Radioactive Material
2) Code Citation: 32 Ill. Adm. Code 330.40
3) Register Citation to Notice of Proposed Rules:
33 Ill. Reg. 12061; August 28, 2009.
4) Date, Time and Location of Public Meeting:
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
9:00 AM to 12:00 PM and 1:00 to 4:00 PM
Illinois Valley Community College
815 North Orlando Smith Avenue
Room C316
Oglesby, Illinois
5) Other Pertinent Information:
At its meeting on August 10, 2010, the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR)
voted to object to the above-proposed rulemaking and prohibit its filing with the
Secretary of State. The Committee found that the adoption of this rulemaking at that time would constitute a serious threat to the public interest. The reason for the Objection and Prohibition is as follows:
JCAR objects to and prohibits filing of the Illinois Emergency Management Agency's rulemaking titled Licensing of Radioactive Material (32 Ill. Adm. Code 330; 33 Ill. Reg.12061) because the rulemaking causes a significant adverse economic impact on he affected public at this time. JCAR further requests that IEMA conduct an additional meeting to enable the affected public to present data in an attempt to show that the public health and safety can be protected with less adverse economic impact.
Therefore, the Illinois Emergency Management Agency (IEMA) is holding a public meeting to allow interested persons to present written and oral testimony to show that the public health and safety can be protected with less adverse economic impact. Testimony should be focused on the basis and extent of the economic impacts of complying with the proposed rule and alternative proposals for protecting public health and safety and future liability for property owners. Interested persons should be prepared to present specific and detailed economic data related to this rulemaking. This should include economic data regarding current itemized costs for capturing radium at water treatment plant and managing it as radioactive waste, for using additional lands for land application, for disposal in a landfill and any other pertinent information related to the costs of management of water treatment residuals and/or sewage treatment sludge containing radium. In addition, interested persons should provide estimated itemized costs to comply with the proposed rulemaking. In regard to public health and safety, interested persons should be able to provide results of representative sampling for fields where land application of radium bearing water treatment residuals and sewage sludge has historically taken place and be prepared to present data to show that past land application has not resulted in a public health and safety concern.
Comment time will be adjusted to accommodate as many interested persons as possible.
Due to time constraints, interested persons should be prepared to submit written
testimony in place of oral testimony. The Agency will consider fully all written and oral comments/testimony presented during the meeting. For those interested persons that can not attend the public meeting, written comment will be accepted until 5:00PM on October 27, 2010 by emailing Louise.Michels@illinois.gov or mail to Louise Michels, IEMA, 1035 Outer Park Drive, Springfield, IL 62704. For further information, please call (217)785-9876.
For additional information concerning this proposed rulemaking, please go to IEMA’s
website at http://www.state.il.us/iema/legal/legal.htm.
Dennis Duffield is available to respond to questions and assist in preparation for the public hearing. Assistance to smaller communities is a part of my responsibilities to the group of stakeholders organized by Joliet, Channahon, Geneva and the DeKalb Sanitary District.
Dennis L. Duffield, P.E, Project Manager
Rogina and Associates, Ltd.
815-693-9871
2) Code Citation: 32 Ill. Adm. Code 330.40
3) Register Citation to Notice of Proposed Rules:
33 Ill. Reg. 12061; August 28, 2009.
4) Date, Time and Location of Public Meeting:
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
9:00 AM to 12:00 PM and 1:00 to 4:00 PM
Illinois Valley Community College
815 North Orlando Smith Avenue
Room C316
Oglesby, Illinois
5) Other Pertinent Information:
At its meeting on August 10, 2010, the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR)
voted to object to the above-proposed rulemaking and prohibit its filing with the
Secretary of State. The Committee found that the adoption of this rulemaking at that time would constitute a serious threat to the public interest. The reason for the Objection and Prohibition is as follows:
JCAR objects to and prohibits filing of the Illinois Emergency Management Agency's rulemaking titled Licensing of Radioactive Material (32 Ill. Adm. Code 330; 33 Ill. Reg.12061) because the rulemaking causes a significant adverse economic impact on he affected public at this time. JCAR further requests that IEMA conduct an additional meeting to enable the affected public to present data in an attempt to show that the public health and safety can be protected with less adverse economic impact.
Therefore, the Illinois Emergency Management Agency (IEMA) is holding a public meeting to allow interested persons to present written and oral testimony to show that the public health and safety can be protected with less adverse economic impact. Testimony should be focused on the basis and extent of the economic impacts of complying with the proposed rule and alternative proposals for protecting public health and safety and future liability for property owners. Interested persons should be prepared to present specific and detailed economic data related to this rulemaking. This should include economic data regarding current itemized costs for capturing radium at water treatment plant and managing it as radioactive waste, for using additional lands for land application, for disposal in a landfill and any other pertinent information related to the costs of management of water treatment residuals and/or sewage treatment sludge containing radium. In addition, interested persons should provide estimated itemized costs to comply with the proposed rulemaking. In regard to public health and safety, interested persons should be able to provide results of representative sampling for fields where land application of radium bearing water treatment residuals and sewage sludge has historically taken place and be prepared to present data to show that past land application has not resulted in a public health and safety concern.
Comment time will be adjusted to accommodate as many interested persons as possible.
Due to time constraints, interested persons should be prepared to submit written
testimony in place of oral testimony. The Agency will consider fully all written and oral comments/testimony presented during the meeting. For those interested persons that can not attend the public meeting, written comment will be accepted until 5:00PM on October 27, 2010 by emailing Louise.Michels@illinois.gov or mail to Louise Michels, IEMA, 1035 Outer Park Drive, Springfield, IL 62704. For further information, please call (217)785-9876.
For additional information concerning this proposed rulemaking, please go to IEMA’s
website at http://www.state.il.us/iema/legal/legal.htm.
Dennis Duffield is available to respond to questions and assist in preparation for the public hearing. Assistance to smaller communities is a part of my responsibilities to the group of stakeholders organized by Joliet, Channahon, Geneva and the DeKalb Sanitary District.
Dennis L. Duffield, P.E, Project Manager
Rogina and Associates, Ltd.
815-693-9871
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
EPA Issues Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Sustainability Policy
EPA Issues Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Sustainability Policy The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued a Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Sustainability Policy with the goal of increasing the sustainability of water and wastewater infrastructure in the United States. Communities across the country are facing challenges in making costly upgrades and repairs to their aging water infrastructure, which include sewer systems and treatment facilities. Making this infrastructure last longer while increasing its cost-effectiveness is essential to protecting human health and the environment, and maintaining safe drinking water and clean water bodies. The new policy is part of EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson’s priority to protect America’s waters.
The policy emphasizes the need to build on existing efforts to promote sustainable water infrastructure. The policy also focuses on working with states and water systems to employ comprehensive planning processes that result in projects that are cost effective over their life cycle, resource efficient, and consistent with community sustainability goals. The policy encourages effective utility management practices to build and maintain the level of technical, financial, and managerial capacity necessary to ensure long-term sustainability.
The policy represents a collaborative effort between EPA and its federal, state, and local partners. Working with these partners, EPA will develop guidance, provide technical assistance, and target federal, state and other relevant federal financial assistance in support of increasing the sustainability of America’s water infrastructure.
Link to full document
The policy emphasizes the need to build on existing efforts to promote sustainable water infrastructure. The policy also focuses on working with states and water systems to employ comprehensive planning processes that result in projects that are cost effective over their life cycle, resource efficient, and consistent with community sustainability goals. The policy encourages effective utility management practices to build and maintain the level of technical, financial, and managerial capacity necessary to ensure long-term sustainability.
The policy represents a collaborative effort between EPA and its federal, state, and local partners. Working with these partners, EPA will develop guidance, provide technical assistance, and target federal, state and other relevant federal financial assistance in support of increasing the sustainability of America’s water infrastructure.
Link to full document
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)