* 3:41 pm - The House just voted on the CTA/RTA bailout bill. It failed to reach the three-fifths level and was placed on the order of Postponed Consideration.
* 3:55 pm - As I told subscribers this morning, the House Speaker’s plan to not read the governor’s budgetary line-item and reduction vetoes into the journal today has become an issue. Rep. Jay Hoffman, the guv’s floor leader, just asked whether the vetoes would be read into the daily journal. Hoffman was told that they would be getting back to him “in a timely manner.” Here’s the relevant Constitutional language…
The house to which a bill is returned shall immediately enter the Governor’s objections upon its journal.If within 15 calendar days after such entry that house by a record vote of three-fifths of the members elected passes the bill, it shall be delivered immediately to the second house.
In other words, the House, which is the originating chamber for the budget, is supposed to read the vetoes in immediately, which then starts the 15-day clock.
* 4:20 pm - From Rep. Fritchey’s blog…
The real surprise wasn’t the number of Republican votes for the [mass transit bailou] bill, however, it was the number of Democrats who did not support this issue that is critical to so many of us and our constituents. Some of the ‘no’ votes were disappointing but not shocking (Chapa LaVia, Franks), but others were very curious indeed.
A handful of Democratic legislators allied with the Governor did not support the bill, and while I don’t want to get into a he said/she said exercise, it is my understanding that the Governor (either directly or through his office) was involved in pulling votes off of the bill.
My understanding is that the Governor may announce a ‘plan’ as early as tomorrow to address both the mass transit issue as well as the larger issue of a capital bill. For those keeping count, this plan would be in line behind the one to ‘rock the system’ on campaign finance and ethics; the one to improve health care for Illinoisans, and countless others.
In other words, a big splashy press conference to introduce a plan that will have little chance of actual passage.
* 4:33 pm - From the AP…
The vote on the funding plan was 61-48. It needed 71 votes to pass.
* 5:08 pm - Statement by Gov. Rod Blagojevich…
“I believe a tax on working families for transportation is a backdoor fare hike, and I believe the legislature was correct in rejecting that approach. For months I have urged the leadership in the House to consider alternatives, but unfortunately no progress has been made. Now, after the legislature’s rejection of Speaker Madigan’s tax increase, we are in early September without a resolution and the clock still ticking. This has never been a question of whether we should fund mass transit – that is essential. It is a question of how. I will continue to push to close corporate loopholes and to find other sources of revenue to help fund the CTA and RTA without raising taxes on people.”
* 5:10 pm - Press release from the Transportation for Illinois Coalition…
Statement attributable to Doug Whitley, president of the Illinois Chamber of Commerce and a co-chair of TFIC:
“Today’s action in the Illinois House of Representatives underscores the importance of transportation funding for the people of the State of Illinois. Unfortunately, the failure to win approval of the transit funding and reforms in this measure brings us closer to the realization that there is a public transportation crisis that must be resolved. There is now even greater urgency that Illinois’ elected officials find appropriate solutions for the state’s critical transit and capital transportation needs. We urge them to continue working in good faith to come to a resolution that will provide for transportation needs and avoid serious consequences for our citizens and our state.”
Statement attributable to Michael T. Carrigan, president of the Illinois AFL-CIO and co-chair of TFIC:
“Today’s House action should be viewed as a stepping stone toward ultimately passing legislation to provide critical transportation funding our state desperately needs. Clearly, there is much work to be done. But with each step in this process, the public and elected officials learn more about the need for transportation funding in Illinois and the dire consequences of inaction. We urge lawmakers to continue to work toward a transportation funding plan that will address the state’s critical transportation needs and can be enacted into law.”
* 5:14 pm - Audio from Speaker Madigan’s post-vote press conference is below. Madigan promised to continue looking for votes for the bill, saying some members were absent today. “I see the real possibility that we can get to 71 votes.”
More…
“We’ll talk to all interested parties on the issue. We’ll talk to Rep. Cross… to find converts for this bill… There were certain Downstate Democrats who in my judgement were voting no because the governor’s office was telling them to vote no. If you’re looking for areas to find additional votes, I would suggest you look at the House Republicans and those who are interested in working with the office of Gov. Blagojevich…
“This is a good, solid bill. This is a bill that ought to have the support of a governor of Illinois who lives in the City of Chicago and within blocks of the most popular rapid transit lines in the city, that being the Brown Line. This should have the support of the [House Republicans] because there is capital in the bill… There ought to be enthusiastic support for this bill.”
[audio:MJM-MassTransit-090407-1.mp3]
More…
“I think there’s going to be be great hardship throughout Northeastern Illinois. There’ll be great hardship in Chicago. Don’t stop there. Think in terms of all of the senior citizens in the suburban areas. Think in terms of those who use the paratransit offered by Pace in Chicago and throughout all the suburban areas. All of those people are going to be impacted.”
And still more…
“I think with the passage of time there will be 71 votes for this bill and when there are we’ll call the House into session.”
- Order? - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 3:53 pm:
Can someone please tell me what it means to be on the order of postponed consideration?
- anon - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 3:55 pm:
What do you think the reasoning behind the Speaker calling this bill? It seems everyone knew there wasn’t going to be enough yeas to pass. I don’t think he needed a vote just to get a scorecard as it seemed everyones intentions were known. He also now has the problem that Rich talked about in Capfax today with the clock ticking on the govs vetos of the budget items.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:01 pm:
“Order,” not to be too critical, but if you would have just Googled the phrase “order of postponed consideration” and “Illinois” you would’ve found this…
===If the sponsor deems that there are not enough votes to pass a bill, (s)he may (one time) put the bill on the order of postponed consideration to gather more support. ===
No formal record is kept of the rollcall if the bill falls short and is put on Postponed Consideration, but the two caucuses usually take photos of the big board so that they have an informal record. The move allows the sponsor to get another bite at the apple.
- Abraham - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:01 pm:
As Capitol Fax pointed out this morning, the next constitutional issue between the House and the Governor would arise if the House did not record the Governor’s veto of the budget bill. Rep. Jay Hoffman just made inquiry of the Chair (Rep Turner) as to whether the Speaker was going to record the veto today or, alternatively, under what authority he was proceeding in not doing so. Rep. Turner said the he would get back to Rep. Hoffman.
The veto session calendar for October was also just released and, according to Rep. Turner (in the chair) the October veto session schedule was agreed to by the Senate.
- Crimefighter - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:09 pm:
What if they wait like two weeks then read it in, veto is sustained automatic cause they didn’t do it when they were supposed to or it would be allowed then they could vote to override?
- Bluefish - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:13 pm:
I find it hard to believe Madigan would make a tactical mistake at this point. He has something up his sleeve.
- Concerned Citizen - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:14 pm:
Define “immediately.” Sort of like Art and the speaker getting back to Jay “in a timely manner.”
I love Springfield in the fall.
- Siyotanka - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:18 pm:
Rich…FYI
An interesting read at Fritchy’s web site about the Gov’s actions.
- fedup dem - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:18 pm:
Does anyone know what the failed vote on the transit bill was?
- ILPundit - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:22 pm:
Not reading the veto in isn’t a tactical mistake by the Speaker. He clearly believes that any veto override is a dead issue because Emil won’t call it. No matter what the House does, those vetoes stand unless the dynamics change.
Immediate action on the veto does nothing to change the dynamics. Waiting, doing Committees of the Whole, doing regional hearings — in other words, twisting the knife — has a chance to change those dynamics.
For all of Hoffman’s and Blago’s bluster over the House’s refusual to read the veto into the record — the fact remains that the only risk to Madigan in making this move is that it simply sustains the status quo. In other words, no real risk at all.
On the flip side, its going to make the coming weeks very uncomfortable for the Governor and for Emil.
All in all, a winner of an equation if you are the Speaker.
- Anon - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:23 pm:
fedup dem: Tribune reports 61-48.
- So Ill, who is now No Ill, but still Ill - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:25 pm:
I tend to side with Madigan on this stuff, but…the Constitution is pretty clear on the immediately part. Get it in there, Mikey. Come on. Don’t be like Rod.
- s - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:26 pm:
Rich - a worse chance of passage than this one?
And, Rich, do you really believe there are even 10 legislators anymore who would pull their vote off the bill at the Governor’s asking?
That whole accusation seems like blame-avoidance to me. Sure, the Governor should have come out for this plan or a variation of it, but it isn’t his fault it failed. The votes just simply weren’t there.
- Mr. W.T. Rush - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:27 pm:
Wonder why Dandy Dunkin voted “present” Is he interviewing to run the film office?
Did Jay MaGoo read the right part of the constitution on budget veto messages…opps
- s - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:28 pm:
And, to be honest, if the Governor HAD come out for it, I am sure the vote total would have been even more lopsided…
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:28 pm:
is it time for the historic Chicago “transit flight” of 2007, when all the transit riders move to other cities that are actively investing in their existing or new rail transit systems, like Denver, Salt Lake City, LA, Phoenix, New York, DC, etc.? do i stick it out or sell my condo before the real chaos hits when we see what’s going to happen next year as we sink even deeper? i mean, if Chicago is really that determined to become the next Detroit…
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:35 pm:
“s,” you need to wake up a little and read what I’ve written and posted today. The governor did work against the bill, so he has to wear the jacket. Others are to blame as well, but there’s absolutely no denying that he contributed to this failure.
- Fritchey called it - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:38 pm:
Fritchey is 100 percent right there.
If I was going to pretend to be Mike, I’d call each veto up one at a time and make it as painful a PR hit ont he governor as possible, a steady water torture of daily press reports about heartless and illogical cuts, in order to throw public opinion pressure onto Jones’ members. Make it hot enough for Jones’ members to be on the “wrong” side of these issues, that they bolt Jones’ control.
- Just My Opinion - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:38 pm:
Perhaps we should compare the dems who did not vote for the tax and their pork to see if Rod bought their “no” vote by leaving their projects in the budget. Gosh, do ya think?
- Cal Skinner - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:45 pm:
So, what Republicans voted for the bill.
Incidentally, John, Jack Franks announced weeks ago that he was against the CTA bailout.
- Cal Skinner - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:48 pm:
And why should John be surprised that a Democrat from Autora would vote against it?
Democrat Jack Hill of Aurora raved against the original RTA bill…as did Jack Franks Democratic Party predecessor, Tom Hanahan.
- s - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:54 pm:
Rich, even Rep. Fritchey acknowledges that the Governor doesn’t have enough pull to get 10 votes off the bill:
” Rep. John Fritchey said…
Fair observation. I could link about 5 of the no votes to the Governor off the top of my head, but that still isn’t enough to pass the bill.”
The Governor may have tried to do something here, but he is irrelevant. This bill would have died on its own (and I argue that it did), without any help from the Governor.
- Six Degrees of Separation - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:56 pm:
Anon 4:28:
Please don’t be silly, those sun belt cities with their miniscule “light rail” systems are still very auto-centric. DC and NYC do have nice rail transit; the DC Metro gets high marks for its cleanliness and high standards, and NYC for its extensive network (Bernard Goetz and Colin Ferguson incidents notwithstanding). A broken Chicago transit network is still likely more effective than any of the sun belt systems, and you most likely WILL need your car to live there.
- anon - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 4:56 pm:
We were trying to get Franks to vote for a fee change last year on another issue. While he told us he saw the purpose of raising the fees, he says he has never voted for any bill that included a raise in fees or taxes. Didn’t expect him to change his mind on this one.
- Cassandra - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 5:00 pm:
This is starting to feel like the “government shutdown” that wasn’t.
The transits are going to get some money eventually, but perhaps not as much as they’d like. They’ll maintain most if not all of their routes. And let’s face it, a nice chunk of that extra money would go for inflated CTA/RTA exec salaries, even plusher exec offices and exec “training” in exotic locations. I’m glad the guv is making them work for it. And I certainly don’t want my taxes raised…I’d rather pay the fare increases. The minute public transit gets a shot of government money they start screaming for the next bite. Before they’ve even swallowed the first.
While they are waiting (and whining) perhaps public transportation honchos could work on some contingency plans to minimize the pain for the average citizen while this fight is going on.
Maybe (gasp) they’ll find some ways to save money
and improve service through creativity instead of throwing more money at everything. Earn their hefty paychecks in other words.
- Anon - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 5:06 pm:
Cassandra: CTA has already made $18 million in administrative cuts since Ron Huberman became president. As a result, the cuts and fare increases that will be implemented on the 16th are less severe than originally planned.
- Captain America - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 5:24 pm:
This mass transit funding defeat shall not stand.
Woe is Governor Blagovich when the Chicago electorate wakes up and realizes what what he hath wrought with his political gamesmanship. Politicans everywhere, but not a statesman anywhere. I;m still betting on the Illinois Machiavelli, Mike Madigan.
Godfather Jones should be watching his political back because I sense that his members, including his leadership team, are likely to become very restless around the ides of September,if and when transit service cuts are initiated.
- Hefty Paycheck? - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 5:27 pm:
Cassandra, why do you always side with the Governor? The man clearly lacks insight and creativity and that 10% pay raise he gave himself was certainly HEFTY for a leader who’s demonstrated his inability to lead.
Offcourse He pilled off some votes. Why should he care? Afterall, He’s got AIRBLAGO!
- Anon - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 5:28 pm:
I wonder what Mayor Daley will do now that this went down? He doesnt have the best relationship with the speaker, and his relationship with the governor may now be a bit strained (it didnt help that the mayor was taking shots at the grt throughout the entire session, as well as other shots at the governor). Now he will have to do something.
Can Mayor Daley allow these service cuts and fare increases? Is it possible for him to continue to blame Springfield for the CTA’s money woes? Or will he dip into that money the city got for the skyway?
I cant wait to see where he comes down on this issue.
- Patrick McDonough - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 5:28 pm:
I would really think Rep. Fritchy could “Rock the System” with real ethics reform. Starters, State Reps should be a full time positions, no side jobs and other interests. We could start with poster child State Rep. John “Hired Trucks” D’Amico. Should John D’Amico make $85,000.00 a year from the Chicago Department of Water Management and make a killing as a State Rep. How can anyone be two places at once. What is the attendance record like? I like Fritchy, but I would like a straight answer. Double pensions, double interests.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 5:34 pm:
“s,” I said he gets part of the blame.
Ever work a rollcall? The closer a bill gets to passage, oftentimes, the more chance it has of passing. Not always (as in the case of bills that never seem to reach the final goal line), but often.
- Susan - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 6:12 pm:
Fritchey will never “rock the system” and give up his fancy job with an expensive lawfirm where he cashes in on Ald Banks (his Uncle by marriage’s) clout as a zoning attorney. He also started Chicago Pac to dole out money to whomever he pleases. Seems like he’s part of the problem. I can’t wait to hear the righteous defense from “Former Minon” or Fritchey.
As for this bill, get over it and get back to work. Why should downstaters support it?
- To Patrick - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 6:14 pm:
Fritchey’s record on ethics reform is as solid as it gets. And he has no second public job or pension, he’s a private lawyer. I agree on the multiple public pension stuff though. Can we stick with talking about mass transit here though?
- Rep. John Fritchey - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 6:41 pm:
Sigh, this is what happens when you try to open up the process.
“Susan” - Here comes your ‘righteous defense’.
First, feel free to name another legislator who has accomplished more on reform issues over the last decade than I have. And I’m talking about results, press releases don’t count.
I am a sole practitioner, have been for years now, so much the fancy job with an expensive law firm.
And yes, I started ChicagoPAC, with, gasp, my own funds to help other candidates with similar philosophies and use for political activities that I may undertake unrelated to my role as State Representative.
I find it hard to believe that you see a problem with that. But as you’ve shown, you won’t let the facts get in the way of a good rant.
I’ve written enough for one evening. All the best everybody.
- Gregor - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 6:45 pm:
This is a crisis of the governor’s making, and he’s ticked off not only the Speaker, but Mayor Daley. No way he’s going to overcome the two of those when they are on the same side.
- To Susan - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 6:52 pm:
Just heard a couple reasons on the news why other legislators should support it.
Springfield mass transit would gain 900K/year
Champaign-Urbana would gain 2million/year.
Reason enough?
- True Comparison - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 7:10 pm:
Another contributor to the failure that many might be missing, the Realtors sent out a call to action to 60,000+ members to call their legislators to oppose this bill. The opposition was due to the Transfer Tax component.
- Cassandra - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 7:15 pm:
Since I am fast approaching the age of senior citizenship myself, I find it annoying when the sponsors of various expensive schemes to bail out badly run and patronage-ridden government programs like public transit point to senior citizens as among those who will be horribly affected by making these programs live within their means.
I walk 5-10 miles a day and do yoga and expect to do so for decades. My doctor expects that I will do so as well. I’m not poor–I can afford the CTA increases. I can cook my own meals with food I can purchase on my own. I don’t need a home health aide from the horrendously awful Department of Human Services and I don’t plan to. I (gasp) did financial planning to ensure I could pay for my own services. And my friends, many of them senior citizens also, are equally able to manage the vicissitudes of life, including CTA cutbacks. We can take cabs. Ride bikes. Walk.
With the baby boomer population fast approaching senior citizenhood, pols need to be careful about their tendency to treat senior citizens like impoverished (and stupid) victims to further their political agendas.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 7:16 pm:
The debate over the 15 day rule not only affects the budget bill, but all the substantive House bills the Governor has vetoed or amendatorily vetoed up to today. I’ve generally agreed with Madigan’s tactics in his battle with Blago, but I believe he should have scheduled a vote. Now Emil can claim that even if he were to change his mind, Madigan’s procedural blunder results in all the Governor’s changes being sustained.
- Bill - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 7:22 pm:
Patrick,
Look who’s talking! When was the last time , if ever, you put in a full day’s work? Are you still pulling your salary while you loaf and make up disability claims? Have you filed any whistleblower lawsuits for back pay that you never earned? You get paid to dig sewers but when was the last time you were in one? You and coconut and the rest of the nut cases cost the city a heck of a lot more than Fritchey and D’Amico.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 7:49 pm:
Very disappointing that Blago would work against his own city. I didn’t think he could get more petty than his behavior the last month.
My grandpa used to say “That boy’s as useless as tits on a bull”. Well as a Governor he’s useless. He needs to be taken to the woodshed.
- Just My Opinion - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 7:51 pm:
Cassandra, I wish for you some compassion. Perhaps you should walk in the shoes of someone disabled, riddled with arthritic pain, blown out knee and/or hip joints, a terminal illness, high prescription bills, fixed income with minimum Social Security every month, food stamps, cramped living quarters and perhaps even no AC in the summer. Life if not as good as yours for most of our senior citizens. I am not an impoverished or stupid senior citizen but I sure know when to realize I’ve been blessed and not forget those who have not been.
- Arthur Andersen - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 8:11 pm:
Bill, has another tender nerve of yours been touched here, man? Quite a post-almost like reading the Sun-Times.
- Little Egypt - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 8:14 pm:
Bill, where have you been?
- plutocrat03 - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 8:25 pm:
Why is the hardship always greater for those who are already accepting subsidies from the government than for those who have to pay more for the increased subsidies?
- Lainer - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 8:33 pm:
Cassandra, I am glad that you have been fortunate enough to maintain good health, keep on a prosperous career path (I assume you have an adequate retirement income) and make all the right financial decisions in your life. Not all of us have been able to do so.
And I know this from experience — old age catches up with EVERYONE sooner or later if they don’t die first. You could be perfectly healthy and active one day then suddenly go downhill and become disabled or die. I saw it happen to my grandmother — I have a picture of her out puttering in her garden on her 85th birthday, looking not a day over 70; two years later she had to go to a nursing home and a year after that she was dead. My husband’s grandmother lived on her own and drove her car on her 93rd birthday; three months later she was sick, two months after that she died. All I am saying is that you cannot assume that you will never need help if you do all the “right” things.
- Kuz - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 8:38 pm:
Very short sighted move by the Realtors. The transfer tax is miniscule. But, how’s business going to go for city condos if all of these buses and trains are cut? Young professionals with money use transit for short commutes, and they are smart enough 2 uze teh GOOGle. Better to rent and wait a couple of years until the Brown line is finished.
- plutocrat03 - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 9:12 pm:
to Kuz,
Have you seen the RE listings, length of the listings on the market and percentage of the original listing price the sale was made?
When did a new tax ever help a wounded market?
Creating a new tax will delay the recovery or allow the downturn to continue.
- pc - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 9:39 pm:
@Pluto: a study done on similar service cuts proposed in Philadelphia this past year (i.e., $100M found that those cuts would reduce local property values by over $5 billion. Those of us, like Rod and I, who pay dearly for houses near the “L” would see our property values drop. I don’t see how that helps the Realtors very much. And keep in mind that the city’s real estate market is doing much better than the suburbs’ right now.
- A Citizen - Tuesday, Sep 4, 07 @ 10:15 pm:
Gov’s approval rate is at 22% ! That is WAY below a vote of confidence level. He should resign !! And not show his face in public out of shear Shame.
- Lotta Liaison - Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 1:08 am:
“Dandy Dunkin” voted NO because it’s a tax increase on working families, right?
Blago knows who he has on his side…the people who voted NO on the budget voted NO on this bill.
Crimefighter, the legislative chambers decide whether or not to take action on a veto message; they, and no one else, decide whether to sustain or override.
- Fat Cat Beneficiaries - Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 7:05 am:
“@Pluto: a study done on similar service cuts proposed in Philadelphia this past year (i.e., $100M found that those cuts would reduce local property values by over $5 billion.”
Transit should be paid for by people who benefit from it. From your statement, homeowners benefit from transit to the tune of $5 billion.
I say let them pay for it.
Also, the City of Chicago benefits from that $5 billion in terms of property taxes assessed.
I say let them pay for it.
Why should the single mom from Elgin working multiple jobs to keep her kids clothed have to pay for this? Let the fat cat beneficiaries pay for it.
- Mr. W.T. Rush - Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 7:11 am:
Dandy Dunkin vote was his imititation of the Electorlux salesman visiting BlunderBoyBlago. No more.
- Lula May - Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 7:45 am:
This regional tax is .25 cents on a $500.00 purchase.
I don’t use mass transit and I tend to vote as a fiscal conservative.
But I see only positives for the northeast region by implementing this tax.
Less pollution and less traffic are well worth the .25 cents.
- Lula May - Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 7:55 am:
I have a suggestion. On our tax forms there is a box you check if you would like to contribute to the presidential campaigns.
Could we use that same concept with the Illinois tax forms ?
Would you like to contribute $1.00 to Illinois mass transit ?
I think the CTA - RTA - Metra will be in the money. And Blago can say he didn’t raise taxes.
- Fan of the Game - Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 8:12 am:
A question:
Does this transportation bill include funding for all transportation or just mass transit for Chicago and the collar counties (CTA, RTA, Metra, etc.)? In all the comments, people referred to the state’s transportation needs. Is it really a statewide issue?
- Stuck with Sen. CPA - Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 8:15 am:
Don’t forget that Linda Chapa LaVia is and several members of her family are Realtors.