Archive for the ‘Illinois’ Category
When you want to make sure you have access to quality health care, there’s only one place you turn. The Springfield bureaucracy, right?
A task force appointed by Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn wants a state law forcing insurers to spend 80 to 85 cents of every premium dollar on providing health care, or pay rebates to customers.In its initial recommendations released Thursday, the Health Care Reform Implementation Council also recommends legislation giving state regulators the authority to approve or deny health insurance rate increases.
The enforcement would be, pardon my french, a motherfucking catastrophe. Before we even get to the inevitable corruption of the regulatory process, what qualifies as health care? Inevitably there would be some unaccountable regulatory board where the insurance companies spend god knows how much time and money challenging every line item claiming it qualifies as health care, which will drive prices through the roof and make providing actual healthcare next to impossible.
And like I said, that’s before we get to the inevitable corruption. This is Illinois politics, and there are quite literally billions at stake. Does anyone actually think the appointments to these regulatory positions are going to be apolitical? Sort of like it’s just a coincidence the Chairman of the Cook County Democratic Party is also the Cook County Assessor? The political and financial power that would fall on this presumably unelected regulatory board would be massive, and when an insurer is faced with either giving $5 million in political donations or giving a $50 million rebate, what do you think it’ll decide? Considering it’s damn near impossible to prove quid pro quo, it would be idiotic to think this wouldn’t happen.
These ideas were bad when they were included in Obamacare. They are infinitely worse when it’s suggested to put enforcement in the hands of political appointees accountable to no one but their political bosses in one of the most corrupt political systems in the United States.
- URF Calls on Lisa Madigan to Join 26 States in Federal Healthcare Lawsuit (chicagonow.com)
- IllinoisHealthMatters.org: New Website Is Comprehensive Source for Health Reform Answers (prnewswire.com)
- Illinois Governor Pat Quinn to Sign Civil Union Bill This Afternoon (towleroad.com)
- Illinois faces budget woes (politico.com)
7 out of 7 Illinois Supreme Court Justices agree that Rahm Emmanuel is in fact a resident of Chicago.
The Illinois Supreme Court ruled today that Rahm Emanuel can stay on the ballot for mayor of Chicago, saying in a unanimous decision that he meets the state’s residency requirements despite spending most of the last year as White House chief of staff.
“The voters deserved the right to make the choice of who should be mayor. And what the Supreme Court said basically, in short, that the voters should make the decicions of who will be mayor,” a victorious Emanuel said after slapping backs and shaking hands with commuters at the Clark and Lake elevated train stop near his downtown headquarters.
“The nice part was to be able to tell the news to voters, because a lot of people had not heard it,” Emanuel said.
The court essentially took the position of the Appellate minority, and by that I mean their position is that the Appellate majority are a bunch of political hacks who wouldn’t know established jurisprudence if it jumped up and bit them square on the ass. Allahpundit at Hot Air points out:
So harsh is it, in fact, that two justices wrote a separate concurrence criticizing the court for being unduly vicious towards the appellate court. (“[T]he tone taken by the majority today is unfortunate…”)
Surprise surprise, one of the two dissenting concurrences came from Ms. “I Think For Myself and Don’t Care That My Husband Rules the Chicago City Council With an Iron Fist” Justice Burke. Can’t imagine she likes seeing them get this kind of lashing when all they did was what her husband ordered them to.
- Rahm Prevails In Court (talkingpointsmemo.com)
- Illinois Supreme Court Rules 7-0 in Favor of Rahm Emanuel Candidacy for Chicago Mayor (towleroad.com)
- Illinois Supreme Court puts Rahm Emanuel back on ballot (alternet.org)
- Rahm Emanuel’s House successor to endorse him (thehill.com)
- Ill. high court: Emanuel can run for Chicago mayor (msnbc.msn.com)
- Rahm Emanuel Back on Chicago Ballot… for Now (elections.firedoglake.com)
- Appellate court tosses Rahm Emanuel off ballot (dailykos.com)
- Rahm Back on the Ballot (politicalwire.com)
- Rahm’s On the Motherf***ing Ballot! (chicagonow.com)
So yesterday the news broke that Daniel O’Reilly, Village President of Stickney, IL, was busted for improperly claiming tax breaks on two local businesses he owns by the Cook County Assessors Office.
Stickney Village President Daniel O’Reilly improperly claimed property tax breaks on two of his businesses, prompting the Cook County assessor’s office to revoke those exemptions as well as one on his home, an official said Wednesday.
O’Reilly claimed homeowner exemptions on the two businesses since 2003, despite having claimed the exemption on his home in Stickney since 1999, said Kelley Quinn, a spokeswoman for the assessor.
Now if you’re not familiar with the Cook County Assessor’s Office, it’s run by Joe Berrios, noted Mike Madigan crony, chairman of the Cook County Democratic Party and “Mr. Pay-to-Play“. The entire Illinois machine runs through Madigan and Berrios, and “improper tax breaks” are the currency they use. So naturally when I saw this story, I got a little curious.
Turns out there’s something else going on down in Stickney (a suburb near Lyons and Berwyn).
It turns out Lou Viverito, State Senator from the 11th district, Stickney Township Supervisor and another Madigan crony, recently resigned from his Senate seat. Right after he voted for the tax increase and also dicked over the Village of Brookfield.
In addition to his vote on the income tax increase, Viverito was the state legislator who authored a law outlawing any municipality from imposing an amusement tax on a zoo operating on land owned by the Cook County Forest Preserve District.
That law, which passed the Illinois General Assembly on Jan. 7, appears to have thwarted a bid by the Village of Brookfield to impose a 25-cent-per-head tax on admission at Brookfield Zoo. The village imposed the tax in December despite the protests of the Chicago Zoological Society, which operates Brookfield Zoo.
The society lobbied state legislators to pass a law against the tax, which Viverito did in November, a move that blindsided the village.
According to the Tribune, Viverito wants Mayor Steve Landek of Bridgeview to replace him in the Senate. These appointments are done by area committeemen. And it just so happens that a fair amount of Brookfield is in the 11th Senate District, meaning their committeemen get to participate in the choosing of Viverito’s replacement.
Bear in mind the only evidence I’m going off of is listed above (plus what we all know about Madigan and Berrios). What I am almost certain of is someone was lining up votes to challenge Landek in the committeemen vote. Either O’Reilly was looking to be the replacement or he was an integral vote in one way or another and Madigan was sending a message to anyone considering any funny business. I’m guessing the message has been received.
Really, you can’t feel too bad for the guy. Whoever came out of this was going to be a machine crony anyway, and if you’re going to try to take down Madigan’s anointed, you have to be pretty damn stupid to still be suckling at the Berrios’ teet. What did you think was going to happen? If you wanted to just stump for votes without preparing for any consequences, go to the model UN. The Illinois State Senate is probably not the place for you.
- Forrest Claypool takes on Joe Berrios, Mike Madigan and political clout (chicagonow.com)
- Joe Berrios WINS County Assessor Race: Defeats Reformer Claypool (huffingtonpost.com)
- Cook County Assessor Joseph Berrios Hires Family Immediately (chicagonow.com)
- With Berrios in Mind, County IG Issues Advisory Against Hiring Relatives (chicagoist.com)
- Joseph Berrios & the Cook County Board of Review Shatters Property Tax Break Record (chicagonow.com)
- Schulter on Board of Review? Berrios Isn’t Feeling It. (chicagoist.com)
- Need A Job? Get Related to Joe Berrios. (chicagonow.com)
Back in January of 2009, hyped up on stimulus-feva, Illinois passed a $31 billion capital bill called “Illinois Jobs Now”. Today, thanks to the owner of the Chicago Blackhawks and an Illinois Appellate Court a lot of the funding for it is now going…going…gone.
The Illinois Court of Appeals has ruled the General Assembly acted unconstitutionally when it approved funding sources for the state’s $31 billion capital construction program.
The lawsuit that led to Wednesday’s ruling was filed by W. Rockwell Wirtz, better known as Rocky Wirtz. His family is best known as owners of the Stanley Cup Champion Chicago Blackhawks. The foundation of their financial fortune, however, is Wirtz Beverage Illinois, a distributor of alcoholic beverages.
Used to getting their way in Springfield, the Wirtz family was infuriated when the legislature ignored their objections to the liquor tax.
A spokesman for Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan estimated that the ruling eliminated at least 40 percent of the funding sources devoted to the state’s giant capital construction program.
The decision is available here.
Ultimately this is going to cause some big problems, largely for the same reason that this was found to be unconstitutional. For some stupid reason when the package was passed the spending and revenue portions were put in separate bills. The revenue portion, the part that was found to be unconstitutional, was found to be so as it violates Illinois’ Single Subject Rule. The standard for this rule is whether there’s a “natural and logical” connection between the different aspects of a bill. Had the spending and revenue portions been part of the same bill, the funding probably could have been sold as the natural and logical connection of funding the capital bill. Instead, the only thing that connects the provisions in a stand-alone revenue bill is “revenue”, which has already been ruled to be too broad.
This also means that the spending bill is still law. If Madigan’s projections of this cutting 40% of the capital bill’s funding, that would mean there is now $12.4 billion is newly unfunded spending. This would erase all of the benefits to the deficit from the tax hike, and add an additional $5 billion to it. In other words, there is going to have to be another tax hike. Like, right now.
Considering the reaction to the last tax hike, good luck with that.
A lot of the problem could be dealt with by a stand-alone video gambling bill, but that’s going to be a tough sell. Video poker, aka “the crack cocaine of gambling”, was a big issue in the last election in just about every Republican-leaning and centrist area of the state. Most of the new guys ran against video gambling, and the survivors typically ran away from their vote and would be loathe to immediately show that those tacts were bullshit. It could probably pass, but it’d be a lot rougher than it was last time (and it wasn’t pretty last time).
On top of that, back then the proponents of the package had the myth of jobs and stimulus and whatnot to help sell the bill. Now they can’t. Any stimulative effect has long since been priced in, and just as the conservatives expected, Illinois still sucks. So instead of buying jobs, growth and stability, now it’s just staving off a budget collapse to pay for annoying road construction.
In short, get your popcorn ready.
- Illinois Plan for Pensions Questioned (nytimes.com)
- Illinois Voter Restoration Project Supports Illinois Appellate Court Ruling on Rahm Emanuel Residency (chicagonow.com)
- Christie Says He’ll Go to Illinois to Lure Jobs to New Jersey (businessweek.com)
- Emanuel Ballot Appeal to Be Heard by Illinois Supreme Court (businessweek.com)
- Wirtz Dispute Over Liquor Empire (chicagoist.com)
- Wirtz Picks Up Bacardi From Competitor (chicagoist.com)
- Illinois Confirms Inquiry by SEC (online.wsj.com)
Governor Pat Quinn will sign the Civil Union Law on Monday, January 31. The signing ceremony will be in the afternoon in the Chicago Loop, and open to the public. Details will be announced early next week.
Personally, I see the gay rights movement similarly to how I view the modern environmental movement, that it’s a legit movement that allowed itself to be co-opted by a bunch of commies, and subsequently I don’t support it. If it was just about gays, fine, but it’s never been about that. It’s always been “So you’re not a homophobe? The only way you can prove it is voting for these communists.” which means it actually has nothing to do with gay rights.
But I digress. Politically, there are two aspects to this that I find most interesting. The first is the idea of shifting baselines, the second is the fundamental differences between the Illinois Democratic Party and the national Democratic Party.
After 2004 gay marriage seemed to the untrained eye to be dead and buried. Everyone seemed to agree (aside from college students and college-town liberals) that marriage was a union between a man and a woman, and the support was so lopsided that pushing for gay marriage ever again seemed quixotic at best. After California, one of the bluest of blue states voted down gay marriage immediately following the left wing blowout of 2008, little seemed to change in the conventional wisdom. Still, gay rights proponents had a plan.
Jumping from no recognition of the legitimacy of gay relationships to seeing them as, for all intents and purposes, identical to straight relationships was clearly a bridge too far. Still, this was not an across the board rebuke of any recognition of gay relationships. Polling showed people really weren’t comfortable with gay partners being kept from each other as one died in the hospital. Polling showed that people didn’t mind the extension of non-child related legal rights (like sharing health insurance) to gay couples. In other words, the door was cracked open.
Smart political movements know that this meant there is an opportunity. If they could create an institution where gays got these things, and with it some sort of legal recognition of the legitimacy of their partnerships, the baseline would shift. In other words, there would be a new normal. Once this new normal took root in the hearts and minds of the American people, it becomes much easier to chip away at the fringes…what about passing on Social Security? What happens if a gay cop dies in the line of fire? Eventually that leads to the question “What happens if a gay cop with two adopted kids dies in the line of fire? Are you going to send them into foster care over letting them stay with their other dad?” Once that’s established, both partners are recognized as parents, which means it’d be silly not to let gay couples adopt as couples. Once they’re doing that, what’s really the point in not letting them marry?
It often feels too slow for the people who believe these are fundamental rights, but it’s also terrifying to people who think that gay marriage is actually a cheapening of the institution of marriage, because it can’t be stopped. Every time they try to stop it, they wind up delegitimizing themselves (What, you’re actually for sending a dead cops kids to foster care just because he’s gay? You actually think that gay couples shouldn’t be allowed to spend their final moments on this Earth together?).
So that’s how something goes from gay marriage in 2004 to how gay marriage is eventually going to become politically acceptable. In short, it’s a done deal (unless the gay rights movement makes a big screw up, opening the door for the evangelicals to do the same thing to them).
So on to the second point. Isn’t it kind of weird that the Democrat governor in one of the bluest states in the nation even bothered with the “Will I or won’t I?” schtick on the Civil Unions bill? To people from outside Illinois, or people from the North Shore it does seem weird, but the reality is that the Illinois Democratic Party has a lot more in common with the Democratic Party from the movie “Gangs of New York” than it does with the national Democratic Party. There are certainly liberals in the Democratic Party, but there is no binding ideology. It has a lot more to do with ethnic tribalism, with the IDA serving as the arbiter of who gets what.
This is why the Republican Party doesn’t really get anywhere here. The Republicans make arguments about ideology – illegal immigration, spending cuts, etc., but when you get in and around the city, it’s all about pork (and whether your ethnicity’s neighborhoods get any). When you try to make an ideological case in this situation, all you’re demonstrating is that you don’t grasp the actual issue at hand.
- Illinois Sensibly Headed Towards Civil Unions [Good News] (jezebel.com)
- Quinn To Sign Civil Unions Bill Soon, In Public Ceremony In Downtown Chicago (huffingtonpost.com)
- Illinois Governor Pat Quinn Pushes for Civil Unions (towleroad.com)
- Lesbian Couple Challenges French Ban on Gay Marriage (pinkbananaworld.com)
- Elton John attacks ban on gay marriage (guardian.co.uk)
- Illinois Passes Civil Union Bill Will Gay Marriage Be Legal? [Video] (realestateradiousa.com)
- Chicago Mayor Richard Daley: Civil Unions Are Nice, But Gay Marriage Is Even Better (gayrights.change.org)
I know that treating the Constitution like it was some kind of, ahem, law is not particularly in vogue right now, but let’s think about this one for a minute:
Policymakers are working behind the scenes to come up with a way to let states declare bankruptcy and get out from under crushing debts, including the pensions they have promised to retired public workers.
Unlike cities, the states are barred from seeking protection in federal bankruptcy court. Any effort to change that status would have to clear high constitutional hurdles because the states are considered sovereign.
But proponents say some states are so burdened that the only feasible way out may be bankruptcy, giving Illinois, for example, the opportunity to do what General Motors did with the federal government’s aid.
So sovereign states would go to a court that would have to be empowered to dictate their current and future asset allocation. It’s OK, it’s a just a hurdle, right?
Naturally the bond markets are having a shit fit even at the mention of this, which strikes me as kind of silly considering if you’re into bond trading chances are you can do math, at least at the level where it’s fairly obvious some kind of default is coming with most states.
Still, there is some precedent:
The story began, as so many do, with the best of intentions. In 1927, the state of Arkansas took responsibility for $54.8 million in debt sold by hundreds of road districts to prevent its default.
Combined with the state’s own $84 million in highway-system bonds and $7.2 million in toll-bridge securities, the assumption of district bonds pushed Arkansas’ debt to $146 million. Coupons on the bonds were as much as 5 percent.
Fast forward to March 1933 in the depths of the Great Depression — not Senator Reaves’s best of circumstances. The Arkansas General Assembly passed the Ellis Refunding Act, which sought to exchange all outstanding highway debt for state bonds carrying a 3 percent coupon, maturing in 25 years.
“Interest on highway and toll-bridge bonds, amounting to $770,500, due March 1, is in default, and this fact spurred the Governor in his demand for a refunding program that would yield revenue sufficient to meet any emergency and insure stability to outstanding obligations,” the New York Times reported.
Actually, this wasn’t the first state default. Still, read the piece. Basically what happened was the bondholders got an injunction against using gas or automobile taxes for anything but highway maintenance, and Arkansas cut a deal with the bondholders where they raised the taxes and eventually paid off the bonds (but not without nearly defaulting several more times).
The issue is that back then Arkansas guaranteed the debt with a specified revenue stream (gas and auto taxes). Now they’re all general obligation, meaning they’re backed with the full faith and credit/taxing authority of the issuing state. This could mean there’s no recourse, or it could mean that some random federal judge could use the power of injunction to determine what things a state could legally pay for before paying off its debt, even without bankruptcy. The state would still be sovereign in a de jure federalist sense, but as a bond issuer who has entered into default they’d be like any corporation that did the same.
So unless I completely misinterpreted GO bonds (which is a definite possibility) the goal of creating a mechanism for bankruptcy would be more about codifying what happens in this situation instead of leaving it entirely up to the whims of whatever judge gets this turd dropped at his/her doorstep than it is a federal power grab. That said, it would still be a massive federal power grab, because granting states the ability to declare bankruptcy means they give up their sovereignty regardless of whether they ever use this ability, as federal sovereignty is a necessary premise of the ability even existing.
Obviously, any lawyer input on this would be greatly appreciated.
- NYT: Plans being drawn up to let states go bust (msnbc.msn.com)
- Bankrupt ideas for states (ftalphaville.ft.com)
- Bondholders, Unions In High-Stakes Battle Over State Bankruptcy (blogs.forbes.com)
- U.S. state bankruptcy bill imminent, Gingrich says (financialpost.com)
- Is there a secret plan to have states default on their public employee pensions? (preaprez.wordpress.com)
- A Path Is Sought for States to Escape Their Debt Burdens (nytimes.com)
Via Drudge Report, NBC is reporting the FBI has made the biggest mafia bust in New York history:
With more than 100 arrests expected, officials said the charges this day surpass the large 2008 mafia raids where 80-plus suspected members of organized crime were charged.
At that time, John ‘Jackie the Nose’ D’Amico and other reputed leaders of the Gambino crime family were targeted in the U.S. while Italian authorities conducted simultaneous raids on mafia groups there.
FBI officials have said organized crime is still active in New York’s construction industry. Labor union corruption, loansharking and gambling among the other schemes run by the mob.
FBI officials did officially confirm the arrests.
The mafia has been greatly romanticized through American cinema, but these busts are always a good thing. Still, these mobsters have nothing on Madigan when it comes to organized crime. None of them ever thought to get the entire state government under their thumb and install their own daughter as attorney general. Their biggest mistake is they just didn’t think big enough.
Not long after developer Anthony Rossi got City Hall approval for a much-needed zoning change in downtown Chicago, he received a surprising phone call from the speaker of the Illinois House.
Michael J. Madigan wasn’t calling to talk about state issues. Instead, Madigan was drumming up legal business for his property tax appeal firm.
“When Mike Madigan calls and asks for a meeting, you meet with him,” Rossi said in an interview with the Tribune.
Madigan and his law partner met with Rossi in September 2008. Together they went one by one through the portfolio of buildings Rossi represents until he referred them to a downtown high-rise he manages that might need a tax attorney.
“Nobody wants to piss off the speaker of the House,” Rossi said. “I mean, I was born and raised in this town.”
The firm got the contract. It was another success for Madigan, the rainmaker.
The client list for Madigan & Getzendanner includes some of the most prestigious skyscrapers in Chicago’s famous skyline — from the John Hancock Center on Michigan Avenue to the Prudential Plaza towers across from Millennium Park.
In 2006, the last reassessment year in which full statistics are available, Madigan’s firm won enough appeals to cut more than $183 million from the taxable value of the top high-rises it represented, the Tribune examination shows. Most of that success was at the Board of Review, where Madigan ally Berrios is one of three elected members. The panel was established as a separate avenue of appeal to contest the assessor’s decisions.
In broad daylight. Reported in the Chicago Tribune. And the last major official to take him on…a certain Rod Blagojevich…I think we all know what happened to him. Also can’t hurt the guy who’s Senatorial campaign he oversaw occupies a nice white house on Pennsylvania Ave. in DC. Like I said, they just didn’t think big enough.
- Madigan to Quinn: Be Like Mike (chicagoist.com)
- Madigan: Blago’s had his chance (politico.com)
- Forrest Claypool takes on Joe Berrios, Mike Madigan and political clout (chicagonow.com)
- Deus ex Madigan. (preaprez.wordpress.com)
- Democrat Corruption in Illinois: Michael Madigan, Rod Blagojevich, Tony Rezko, That’s What Friends are For! (chicagonow.com)
- Mike Madigan’s ‘Republican’ Opponent: State GOP Holds Fundraiser For P.J. Ryan (huffingtonpost.com)
- Meet Patrick John Ryan (‘R’-CAND, IL-STATE 22). (redstate.com)