Capitol Fax

Rich Miller’s commentary on State Government

After decades of dominating every tiny aspect of life in his legislative chamber, Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan now appears to want his members to grow up a little and do some things for themselves.

One of the first steps in that process to adulthood is handing more power to the House’s five appropriations committees and the House Revenue Committee.

The approp committees have been toothless kittens for decades. They listen to a parade of agency directors outline their upcoming budget requests and press them about jobs for various constituencies, minority and otherwise. Occasionally, an appropriations chairperson will briefly have a seat at the bargaining table when the governor and the leaders sit down to talk turkey. But, for the most part, they’ve been cut out of the process. That’s especially been the case the past two years when the General Assembly has sent “lump sum” appropriations to the governor in order to avoid cuts.

But Illinois’ new “Budgeting for Results” law has given Madigan an opportunity to hand off a bit of power to see how his members deal with it. The law requires that the state first determine how much revenue is available to spend before deciding how to spend it. Then, agencies have to come up with realistic benchmarks to prove that their programs are performing up to par.

So, Madigan has introduced a House resolution to establish much cash will be available to the state from every possible revenue source. Determining the actual anticipated revenues will be the job of the House Revenue Committee, which will begin holding hearings on the matter this week.

Once the resolution is passed, each of the five appropriations committees will be given a spending limit. They will then decide how the state cash is divvied up agency by agency. If they exceed the limit, or discover they don’t have enough money to go around, they’ll have to make cuts.

To be sure, Madigan’s staff will have a lot to do with this process. And dealing with how the Senate determines its own revenue and spending process hasn’t yet been figured out. The two chambers could hold a conference committee (which we haven’t seen in years), or the “budgeteers” (trusted appropriations lieutenants) could step in and negotiate, or Madigan and the other leaders could just take it from there. But considering that over half the chamber sits on a House appropriations committee, it will at the very least be a needed eye-opening experience for these people, who have so often been shielded from making any hard choices.

Madigan, by the way, has also informed standing committee chairmen that they need to learn to say “No” a lot more often. Usually, the committees will approve legislation as a courtesy, or send bills to the floor even though the measures may still need a lot of work. But Madigan is reportedly concerned about the large number of bills introduced this year and wants the chairmen to start weeding them out. In the past, Madigan has imposed limits to the number of bills his members could advance. Now, though, he wants members to try to take more responsibility for themselves.

To an outsider, this story probably looks pretty silly. Of course legislators should be more responsible. But those of us who’ve watched the House over the years know how much they’ve been spoiled by a leader who has taken it upon himself to do everything for them.

After the 2001 terrorist attacks, Illinois’ revenue streams crashed with the economy. The General Assembly was faced with the prospect of approving a budget with less money than the year before. Madigan told Republican Gov. George Ryan and Republican Senate President Pate Philip that his chamber was full of people who wanted to keep spending freely. So, they devised a scheme to pass a bloated budget and then Ryan would either reduce or delete spending items. The House would vote to override the cuts, then the Senate would vote to accept and everybody would be happy.

Now, though, Madigan may be thinking of what might happen when he’s not around to protect his members from reality. Nobody will ever again have the immense power and sway over the process that he’s had. The question, however, is after three decades of pampering his mushrooms, how long will it take to move his members into adulthood?

Rich Miller also publishes Capitol Fax, a daily political newsletter, and CapitolFax.com.

3 Chambers of Commerce Respond to Proposed Sales Tax Increase

To Whom It May Concern:

We, members of the business community of Carroll County, do fully support the education of our youth. We do believe, however, that enough is enough. We do not support the sales tax increasing from 6.5% to 7.5% which has been proposed by the West Carroll School Board.

The business community gladly supports the school system with our property tax dollars, as well as everyone else that lives in the district. In many cases, we pay property tax on both business and residential properties. We support the extra-curricular activities the students participate in financially and emotionally with cash and prize donations for activities and fundraising efforts.

At some point or another, we have all shared with our friends, families and customers the responsibilities of raising children and helping to manage the fundraising volunteer groups and organizations that make our school system work. Most of the business community is active at every level of contributing to the greater good of the communities that we serve.

The argument that this added tax would be borne by all who pass through our communities and spend money is short sighted in our opinion. Most of the money spent in our hometowns is by the people who live, work and own homes and business property here. To think that the tourists will or can support an additional tax, no matter how subtle it may seem, is to not use common sense. Why would they stop here and buy their weekend supplies when they can, depending on their home’s location, pay the same or less and incorporate that expense into travel budget?

What seems to be a minuscule 1% increase in sales tax is truly a fifteen percent (15%) increase (1% divided by 6.5% equals 15%). When coupled with the two percent increase in income tax recently enacted by the state, we are realizing a substantial increase in the tax burden per household in Carroll County.

Robert H. Canier, Jr., President of Savanna Chamber of Commerce

Dennis Bowman, Board Member of Savanna Chamber of Commerce

Pam Brown, Executive Director of Savanna Chamber of Commerce

Robert Hatheway, Mount Carroll Chamber member

John Huggins, Lanark Chamber member

Laura Miller DeSpain, Mount Carroll Chamber member

Randy Remrey, Mount Carroll Chamber member

Larry DeSpain, Mount Carroll Chamber member

Scott Sullivan, Savanna Chamber of Commerce member

We Won’t Be Fooled Again

In response to the letter regarding the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (Feb. 23, pg 23), I agree that The United Nations’ Rights of the Child treaty is absolutely unacceptable and should be opposed. However, that is not the issue I want to bring to your attention.

ParentalRights.org also advocates for an amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The proposed Parental Rights amendment states in Section 1, “The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right.” Of course it is! Enough said. We know that and we don’t need an amendment to the constitution to reiterate that fact.

It adds, in Section 2, “Neither the United States nor any state shall infringe upon this right without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.” Please, please...think about Section 2 and consider whether or not you really want to support an amendment to the Constitution that gives such UNDEFINED intervention ability to the government.

Who decides what the “highest order” is? Is anyone naive enough to think it will be the parents who get to decide? Why, oh why, would anyone support an amendment with a statement which leaves the door WIDE OPEN to government interference in the upbringing of our children?

This is dangerous and certainly not an amendment that we should promote. PLEASE DON’T BE FOOLED into supporting this!!

Rogene Hamilton

Pecatonica, IL

Government in Exile

State senators from Indiana and Wisconsin have chosen to exile themselves in Illinois, abdicating their responsibilities, forsaking their oath of office, abandoning their constituents, rejecting the very foundation of democracy, and trashing the will of the electorate. As despicable as their actions clearly are, I view the current inaction by several Washington legislators as far worse.

The current federal response to the nation’s budget crisis is beyond bizarre. President Obama’s budget could double the national debt in just 10 years. Mitch Daniel’s CPAC speech outlined the battlefield with crystal clarity; once again in our lifetime, the single greatest threat to America is the red menace. This time around, it’s not the Soviet Union, but red ink which threatens the very survival of our nation.

Although most Americans realize hard choices need to be implemented, only a handful of our representatives have revealed the courage to even show up and engage the enemy. When we should be having a serious debate over where cuts should be made, and defining the details of those cuts, we instead have no meaningful action from far too many, who have, upon sighting the enemy, fled the field, and are now cowering on the sidelines.

Those on the sidelines, in order to distract attention from their own refusal to fight the real enemy, are sniping, taking pot shots at those scant few who are willing to confront the threat head on. Those legislators who choose not to participate in combating the greatest menace facing this country would better serve our grandchildren by just shutting up and fleeing Washington, perhaps exiling themselves in Illinois with their fellow cowards, allowing the real warriors to get the job done.

Terry Smith

Lanark, IL

Clarification

In the February 16th issue of the Prarie Advocate, “City Council Confirms New Lanark Municipal Building and Library Home Funding” by Floyd Roberts (pg. 3), an estimated construction cost of $775,646 was mentioned. This is the cost of the entire project. The cost associated to the Library is $247,000. This is the amount the Friends of FPL are trying raise. Sorry for any confusion.

Steven Kruzek

Publicity Director

Friends of the Lanark Public Library

Wisconsin Unions vs. Governor Walker: A Battle for the Soul of America

By Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson

It is hard to overstate what is at stake in the dramatic showdown between Wisconsin’s teachers and their Republican governor and legislature. The political and economic course of our country hinges on how the issue of public-sector unions is resolved, in Wisconsin and elsewhere.

For the sake of our country’s political and economic future, Gov. Scott Walker and his Republican colleagues need to prevail in the current contest with the Wisconsin teachers’ union and their allies.

That isn’t easy for me to say. As an educator, I have great respect for all those (and they are many) in my chosen profession who capably and even brilliantly serve our nation’s youth. The fact is, though, that the status quo is untenable.

The budget crunch isn’t merely a projected crisis some 30 years in the future. Right now, several state and local governments are careening toward fiscal disaster. There are many factors, of course, but a major one is that retirement plans for public-sector workers are spectacularly underfunded, perhaps by as much as $3 trillion nationwide.

Governor Walker is being cast as the ogre for proposing to avert the onrushing flood of red ink, but the blame properly belongs to his predecessors who made unaffordable and unkeepable promises. All but the most zealous ideologues will admit that you can’t spend what you don’t have, and even some Wisconsin teachers are now indicating a willingness to help balance the state’s budget by contributing more to their pension and health benefits.

Politically, this battle is the ultimate partisan clash. Unions and the Democratic Party are joined at the hip. Unions collect mandatory dues from their members, then contribute massive financial and human support to the electoral campaigns of their political allies (overwhelmingly Democrats). Democrat office-holders repay these favors by granting unions generous legislated benefits, both monetary and in the form of rules that strengthen the political power of union officials. Wisconsin’s Democratic senators took the extraordinary step of fleeing the state in what appears to be a desperate ploy to preserve the flood of union money coming to them, while Republicans seem every bit as hopeful of reducing the flow of tax dollars to their political opponents.

Indeed, it is the use of tax dollars to lobby for more government spending, and thus for more taxes, that is the crux of the problem. Public-sector unionism is the ultimate conflict of interest, because the necessary objective of these unions is to capture control of the very legislatures that vote on their compensation packages.

Even the strongly pro-union Franklin Roosevelt believed that key tactics employed by private-sector unions were inappropriate for workers on the public payroll. In his words, “The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service” due to “distinct and insurmountable limitations.”

I share FDR’s conviction that, in a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, those who work for the government must be servants of the people. When public-sector unions threaten to withhold their services unless the taxpayers, through their elected representatives, pay up, it creates a process of political extortion by which the majority of citizens is made subservient to the public-employee minority. This is the way things work under feudalism or socialism, but is the exact inverse of the proper order in a truly democratic republic.

Some have called the Republican proposals in Wisconsin “union busting.” This is inaccurate. Walker is proposing to reform unions, not to abolish them. He seeks to make the payment of union dues voluntary instead of compulsory.

If teachers believe that what the union leadership is doing is worthwhile, they can continue to support those activities through voluntary contributions. If, on the other hand, Republican teachers would rather not contribute to Democratic candidates, they could follow their conscience and opt out. In a democratic republic, people should be free from being coerced into supporting candidates and causes to which they are opposed.

What is really at stake in the Wisconsin donnybrook is whether individual liberty or government power has the upper hand in our country. We are witnessing a battle for the soul of the republic.

— Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson is an adjunct faculty member, economist, and fellow for economic and social policy with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College.

Corporate Control Must End

President George W. Bush, while using our military to invade Iraq, proudly proclaimed that his (our) goal was to bring democracy to the Arab world. After all, we all favor democracy. What he did not confess is that our government was responsible for bringing Sadam Hussein to power in the first place. Hussein was far from being the first dictator our government had brought to power. His was not the first military we supplied and even trained! Nor has our government confined these nefarious operations to the Arab world. Think Batista in Cuba; Somoza in Nicaragua; Pinochet in Chile; Marcos in the Philippines, etc., not to mention the Shaw in Iran.

The question has to come to mind, why did our government do it? Why did our government sell out on the principle of democracy, [which] we Americans hold so dear? It doesn’t make sense, unless you follow the ALMIGHTY DOLLAR. The flip answer is, because “It is in our vital interest.” Unfortunately, that is not true. Sending the Marines to Nicaragua to overthrow a democratically-elected government, to protect our vital pineapple supply, was not in our vital interest, but it was of vital importance to the Dole Corporation. This has been, and continues to be, the paradigm of U. S. foreign policy. It does not reflect the values of the American people, but it does reflect the value of our corporate world and the multi-billionaires who control them.

Money is power, and power translates into money. Greed is a driving force. It continues to crush ever more people. What are the common denominators?

* A ruling oligarchy

* sham elections

* injustice

* control of the media

* maintain[ing] a divisive society

* scapegoating

* control of the police and military.

Now where have we seen all this? Egypt, Tunisia, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, El Salvador, and Haiti; oh, in virtually every dictatorship our government has propped up. Why? Because our government has valued corporate rights and property rights over human rights. All in the interest of “national defense,” of course. Get with it! Reagan had to invade Granada to protect our supply of nutmeg!

Even the mighty empires of Alexander the Great and of Rome eventually collapsed. The wealthy elite took too much, leaving the vast majority with too little. Life for the commoners became too oppressive, so what did they have to defend? Nothing! And they didn’t defend it, either. Eventually the tipping point arrived, as it has in the Arab world today. Human rights must be respected. Government must be by the consent of the governed, transparent, and truly democratic. The distribution of wealth must be fair and meet the genuine needs of all concerned.

Should we not ask the question of our own government? How does it meet the test? Are human rights respected?

* Phone calls and e-mails are subject to government surveillance without our being aware of it.

* Peace groups are infiltrated and spied upon.

* People have been seized and whisked to other countries, like Egypt, for “interrogation.”

* Prosecutors have withheld information that would clear the accused.

* Police have faked evidence.

All this has been in our news over the last four years. We must not take our rights for granted.

Government must be by the consent of the governed, but how can it be, if we are kept in the dark about what our government is doing? Our politicians can be helped by anonymous non-profits that are financed by multi-billionaires, so as not to reveal the source of their largess. Some have been exposed--such as the Koch brothers financing of the Tea Party and other “grass roots” organizations. Without transparency, is a democratic government even possible?

Can we say that we are truly a democracy when billionaires can create “think tanks” and control the “message,” through the media they own, while spending whatever they like to elect the candidates they like, while the rest of us, maybe, kick in fifty bucks? If billionaire David Koch wants to see Speaker of the House John Boehner, you can bet he gets in the door and can visit as long as he pleases. But see how far you get. Your fifty bucks won’t buy you any face time. That’s our democracy.

A[s for] the distribution of wealth, that’s touchy. Mention that and you get accused of spawning “class warfare” as if we haven’t had that all along. Who got bailed out at our expense? Bank of America, Citi Bank, AGI to name a few; Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae to name some more. Oh, and are they ever doing [well] now, and their bonuses are bigger and better!

So, who are the chief beneficiaries for the Bush tax cut and their extension? Yes, the same jerks we bailed out. Obviously, government is working for them just fine; but what are they proposing for the rest of us? Slashing Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, food for the poor, and homeless shelters. Many of our hard-working people have lost their savings and pensions, due to the deregulation of the banking industry, supported by Republicans and corporate Democrats. The oligarchs are not satisfied! They want more?

The oligarchs had better wake up. Wisconsin is just the tip of the iceberg. If the masses in Egypt can finally wake up, unite, and throw off the shackles of a corrupt, so-called democratic government, what makes them think it can’t happen here? Do they think our National Guard will side with them? Do they think our U. S. Air Force will bomb us?

Before it is too late, they had better check their greed and their power [at the door] and restore a government that works for all Americans and not just the special interests.

Arthur Donart, Ph.D.

Thomson, IL

SENATE WEEK IN REVIEW: Feb. 21-25, 2011

A week after Gov. Pat Quinn unveiled his budget plan for the coming fiscal year, more questions than answers surfaced as lawmakers, editorial writers and the public tried to sort through the numbers, according to State Sen. Tim Bivins (R-Dixon).

Early reviews were generally unimpressive as many questioned why the Governor had included revenues that have not been approved by the General Assembly, in apparent violation of a law he signed just hours after delivering his budget message. New information also surfaced that the budget added nearly 1,000 new employees to state government, Bivins said.

Meanwhile, the Governor’s office announced spending cuts for the current fiscal year that were made more severe because the Administration waited until more than half the year was over before announcing the cuts. However, as has become common in recent years, by week’s end the Quinn Administration appeared to be backpedaling on some proposed cuts.

And, some financial experts were questioning the economic sense of the Governor’s plan to borrow more than $8 billion, which would not only be used to pay old bills, but also to finance increased government spending next year. The Associated Press interviewed an investment firm director, a University of Illinois budget specialist and the chairman of the Commercial Club of Chicago. All three expressed doubts about the borrowing scheme.

In other news, detailed population numbers needed for redrawing state Senate and House districts, as well as Congressional seats, were made public. The new census figures show large drops in Chicago’s population, some significant gains in the outer suburban rings of the Chicago region and a generally stable population in downstate Illinois.

New population numbers will require that each state Senate district will have about 217,450 persons. Thirty-six out of 59 state Senate districts (27 currently held by Democrats and nine currently held by Republicans) were under that target number, while 23 districts (eight held by Democrats and 15 held by Republicans) had more persons than required.

Lines will have to be redrawn in order to equalize the population. Although reform groups and Republican legislators had sought to remove redistricting from the hands of politicians, those efforts were blocked last year. As a result, Democrat leaders will be in control of the mapmaking process with virtually no opportunity for the public to influence the results.

In legislative action, Gov. Quinn signed into law a measure designed to crack down on organized retail crime. House Bill 6460 will allow prosecutors to seek forfeiture of assets of those convicted of organized retail crime.

The new law is aimed in part at gangs and others who steal large quantities of merchandise, often from warehouses or shipping facilities, and then sell the merchandise to retail stores at cut-rate prices. One of the risks of such crimes is that stores can end up stocking stolen merchandise, such as over-the-counter medication and baby formula, whose product temperatures and caretaking needs have not been satisfied.

Capitol Report

By Jim Sacia, State Representative, 89th District

Our local animal shelters are so deserving of your support.

Some national organizations are bilking the public out of millions of dollars by appealing to their kindness and sympathy for abused animals. It’s far too lucrative for them to quit asking you for your money.

Spin it any way you want to folks, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) contributes far less than one percent of the donations it receives to your animal shelters. This is not data made up by Jim Sacia. It comes from credible agencies such as the Center for Consumer Freedom, humanewatch.org, animalallegience.com, dairyherd.com, the local Illinois Farm Bureau offices, and numerous others.

Recently, the “Big Dog” himself, no pun intended, challenged my recent article regarding the fleecing by HSUS of you the citizens, who buy into their swill.

Interestingly, he did not challenge my factual information on the amount of money contributed to them that actually finds its way to animal shelters. Rather, it was an attack on my support for horse slaughter in the United States, which should be termed the humane termination of unwanted horses.

Due to the efforts of HSUS and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, horse slaughter was ended in the U.S. in 2007. Before you rejoice, think of what your support for that did.

The same number of horses (or more) are still being slaughtered. We now have a decimated horse market. Horses that previously brought $1000 at auction now bring less than $100. The “killer buyers” are stuffing them in trailers and transporting them more than forty hours to Mexico with little food and water.

In Mexico their end of life is anything but humane. It would sicken you to know the way in which many are put to death. Nearly 100,000 U.S. horses a year face this plight there, but you can rejoice - out of sight out of mind.

“Big Dog”, his crew, and like-minded national animal rights organizations continue to steal your money and fatten their larders by appealing to your sense of kindness and counting your hard earned money. Their goal - the destruction of livestock agriculture! Yes, they would love us to all be vegans.

I have been writing weekly articles for nearly my entire eight years in office, I often receive responses. Never have I received more positive responses than my recently published article on the fleecing of you by HSUS. They number in the hundreds from across the entire United States. Finally a negative one and it comes from the “Big Dog” himself – go figure.

Give your support to area shelters.