1. - Anonymous - Thursday, Feb 17, 05 @ 3:07 pm:

   This is much ado about nothing. Many bills are supposed to have a fiscal impact consideration. I believe it was once called the fiscal note. If the Governor and legislature are truly concerned about the problem they could introduce two bills and the Governor signs them as a package. The joke of the budget speech was the role reversal. The Republicans who never complained when Thompson, Edgar and Ryan proposed unbalanced budgets expressed high dudgeon yesterday at Governor Rod’s proposals. Likewise, the Democrats who were up in arms in the old days were noticeable by their silence. Why even bother. Let everyone go home and come back May 15th when the real heavy lifting starts.




2. - Anonymous - Thursday, Feb 17, 05 @ 3:12 pm:

   Hmmm… bloggers have been unexpectedly quiet today. Maybe everyone realizes the grinding fiscal position the state is in and tough choices must be made… choices, to which the Gov has presented viable solutions.

   Dead on arrival? Despite what the Repubs want to admit, the governor has laid out an outstanding blueprint to solve the ongoing structural problems that exist in our state. Structural problems that were hand-delivered by the long-standing Republican majority.

   And Rich- you forgot to pull out Watson’s loaded Enron quote. Yes, the one that he ironicly talks about the gov’s math, yet conveniently forgets to mention Ryan’s/his/Repub’s faulty pension accounting that led to the current pension debacle. Based on the $7 billion crisis Filan has managed through the past 2-years, I trust his accounting on this $1 billion. Not to mention addressing the long-term structural issues…




3. - Anonymous - Thursday, Feb 17, 05 @ 9:24 pm:

   I still can’t figure out why the 2002 Early Retirement bill is such a hit on the state budget. The figure of $280 million a year for 10 years is cited as the additional hit to the pension system. Yet, the state payroll is over 10,000 employees lighter than it was before the ERI. Figuring $50,000 per employee 9probably low), the state would be over $200 million a year to the good…unless the “savings” has been squandered somewhere. Isn’t that the purpose of an ERI…to entice older, higher paid workers to leave with a bonus, while realizing the savings by not hiring as many workers to replace them, and paying lower salaries to the few that are hired?

   Add to that the non-existent pay raises for thousands of state managers for the last 2 years, and their 4% take-home pay hit for picking up part of the pension tab.

   Where exactly DID the money go?




4. - Anonymous - Thursday, Feb 17, 05 @ 10:51 pm:

   “Dead on arrival? Despite what the Repubs want to admit, the governor has laid out an outstanding blueprint to solve the ongoing structural problems that exist in our state. Structural problems that were hand-delivered by the long-standing Republican majority.”

   Actually, I think the Tom Crosses of the Republican Party, as well as Cross’ erstwhile ally Mike Madigan, are OK with a lot of the budget stuff. The Jones wing of the Democratic Party, and his clients IFT, IEA, and AFSCME, will work to increase education funding beyond what the Gov proposed, and will also work to kill pension reform.




5. - Dan Johnson-Weinberger - Friday, Feb 18, 05 @ 11:13 am:

   I was wondering about this. If one identified a revenue stream or saving to finance an increased expenditure, and the two are not tied together in the same bill, what (besides trust) is to stop leadership/the governor/some future GA from taking the increased money and cutting the spending that it was to finance? I guess that’s the impetus behind the much-maligned special funds, but 600 some funds is no way to run a government.




6. - Anonymous - Friday, Feb 18, 05 @ 1:35 pm:

   From LRU’s annotated Illinois Constitution:

   … inclusion in a tax act of a provision allocating the proceeds of the tax did not convert the act into an appropriations measure and thus violate this requirement.Regardless of the merits of the plan, how does “pay as you go” run afoul of the constitution?




7. - Anonymous - Friday, Feb 18, 05 @ 5:39 pm:

   Dead on arrival….I hope so…a budget based on revenues from smokers (who may or may not buy cigerattes) and pension cuts (from state workers and teachers unions). Now that is a rock solid revenue plan!! What a pitiful situation we are in. Ryan could have been more conservative in his spending…but did not hand deliver this problem to Blago. Ever heard of 9-11 and the recession? Most states are fighting budget deficits. But what do we do? Blago adds 1 billion in new spending the first year, 1 billion in new spending the second year. We have a spending problem not a revenue problem and Blago will hand delivered it to the next gov in 06.

TrackBack URI

Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.