Federal politics of health care are as much of a mess as the health care issue itself

I find it absurd these days to read or hear the continued Republican rhetoric on the issue of health care when GOP officials claim that President Barack Obama is bringing doom to his Democratic Party colleagues by continuing to push for the issue.

What is so absurd about that issue is not the fact that Republican officials will design rhetoric for this year’s campaign’s meant to damn Obama and his allies, but the idea that they really believe that they’re somehow going to gain a moral victory from this issue.

NOW I DON’T know if the issue is coming up for a vote on Monday, or later this week, or suddenly at a future moment once enough arms have been twisted by the Obama Administration to get them to vote “yes.”

What I see from the various polls is that about half of the people of this nation still approve of Obama’s performance, and that the percentage of people who approve of the measure now pending before Congress to offer health care reform is about the same as Obama’s approval rating.

In short, the people who have a problem with this passing and say they will “take it out” on Obama would have been opposed to the president and his allies regardless and will find some other issue with which to vote against him come the Nov. 2 elections if they can not use health care.

There’s also the fact that those same polls usually show Obama with slightly more people approving of him than disapproving, but Congress usually has approval ratings that resemble something swirling around the political toilet bowl (George W. Bush at his lowest was better liked than Congress is these days).

WHAT IS DISGUSTING to the American people about this issue is not so much that Obama has tried to do something about the current situation in this country where roughly 47 million people who live here do not have any kind of health insurance.

Which means if they get sick, they either do not get treated or they wind up pushing off the expense for their health care upon government-run public hospitals. Which means the taxpayer gets hit with the bill.

So much for the idea that Obama has devised a plan so expensive that the taxpayer will get hit with the bill. We’re going to get hit with a big bill either way. It’s just a difference whether it will be the federal government helping out, or will the county government (that runs the public hospital) have to deal with this all by themselves?

What bothers us is the partisan maneuvering, and on both sides.

WE HAVE A serious problem that for the first time in 16 years, a president is trying to show the initiative to address. Yet on the Democratic side of the Senate and House of Representatives, we have elected officials who behave as though they wish they wore the “R” after their names (for Republican) and are all too quick to make compromises so as to minimize the extent to which health care reform would truly “reform” anything.

And on the Republican side, we get too many partisan pols who just don’t want to touch the issue until a time when they can take credit for it while also protecting the financial interests of the insurance industry officials who are among their biggest financial supporters.

A Gallup Organization poll last week found 48 percent of people disapproving of the current health care reform measure, while only 45 percent liked it.

Considering all the partisan games that have been played with the legislation by Congress, it’s a wonder that the disapproval rating isn’t higher.

YET I THINK it is foolish to think that this somehow reflects poorly upon the president, who currently has 49 percent of the electorate approving of his performance on the job (compared to 44 percent disapproving).

That same Gallup Organization currently gives Congress a 16 percent approval rating overall, with 24 percent approving of Democratic congressmembers and only 14 percent approving of the GOP members.

Anyone who claims the disgust level is aimed solely at Democratic congressmen is lying to you. Part of my intent in writing this commentary is to un-spin that little lie we’re going to hear repeatedly in coming months.

We’re tired of the fact that some people wanted to take health care reform and use it to make statements related to the immigration and abortion debates currently taking place in this country. We hate the fact that the only way this issue has a chance to get through Congress is through political maneuvers so arcane and questionable that some wonder if they comply with the U.S. Constitution.

WE DESPISE THE fact that we are not going to get a straight “up or down” vote on this issue, and that coming up with a way to cover the health care costs of as many people as possible has become bogged down in the muck.

When some people say that Obama should have focused on unemployment and economic issues in general during his first year as president, I wonder how many of those people are making the mistaken assumption that putting people back to work will get them a health insurance plan as a job perk?

For I can’t help but notice the number of jobs that don’t offer any such insurance, or where companies are trying to cut the perks they offer in an attempt to bolster their profitability (although in all fairness, there are cases where it is a matter of turning any kind of profit at all).

Thirty-one percent of people polled may have told Gallup recently they consider “unemployment” to be the most important issue (“healthcare” was third with 20 percent), but health care is an issue that is going to have to be resolved or else it’s lack in certain segments of our society will be the key factor that drags us all down in future years.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Several polls by the Gallup Organization say much about our society these days, but this (http://www.gallup.com/poll/126614/Americans-Say-Jobs-Top-Problem-Deficit-Future.aspx) one about people being more concerned with unemployment and the economy makes me wonder how much people understand how the issues are intertwined.

I wonder how many Chicago-style political tactics are being applied this weekend to remind those so-called moderate Democrats (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/03/sunday-snapshot-the-coming-crunch-week-for-health-care/37461/) in Congress that they do bear the “D” after their names and ought to vote accordingly.

Even if a favorable health care reform vote is taken this week, Barack Obama is going to have to immediately cope with those people who think immigration reform must now become the priority issue (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=10081177) for this administration.

EXTRA: Wisconsin-Stevens Pt. 72-IWU 56

Oh well. It was nice to fantasize for the day about a Final Four (http://www.pantagraph.com/sports/college/illinois-wesleyan/article_a8c9060e-2f1e-11df-b47c-001cc4c002e0.html) college basketball team from Illinois.

Now we can all ponder whether or not the University of Illinois will make their NCAA tourney, or have to settle for (http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/ncb/columns/story?columnist=powers_scott&id=4992908) the NIT. Actually, those of us with sense who care about sports will merely move on to baseball – Opening Day is April 5.

-30-

What goes through Gutierrez’ mind?

It amazes me the way that many people perceive the act of political “compromise” as meaning, “everybody is supposed to make concessions to ‘my’ point of view.”

True political compromise usually entails a willingness by all sides to make concessions – usually after having engaged in some “tough talk” that reflects their ideal stance on an issue.

WHICH IS WHY I have no problem comprehending what is going through the mindset these days of Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill. For the one-time member of the Chicago City Council is merely engaging in the give-and-take of politics by saying he may turn out to be a “no” vote when it comes to the issue of health care reform.

That issue is the priority these days of President Barack Obama, who desperately wants to get something through the legislative process so he can sign a reform measure into law. Doing nothing would give the political victory to his GOP opponents, who would be able to say they can thwart Obama whenever they desire – even though Democrats still hold the majority of members of Congress.

But because of the legislative rules that now give the GOP some influence through the “filibuster” process, Obama and his congressional allies have to engage in significant gamesmanship to get something past Republican officials who want to deny Obama a political victory.

Specifically, it looks like any health care reform measure that winds up becoming law will be close in appearance to the version of the bill that was passed by the Senate. That was a measure that included compromises to more conservative elements who want to use health care reform to ding people interested in the immigration issue.

SPECIFICALLY, PEOPLE WHO can’t verify a valid visa would not be able to get insurance – even if they are capable of buying it on their own. Nobody is talking about government funds being used.

For Gutierrez, the immigration issue has always been the priority. He is the sponsor of the one specific proposal that has been introduced before Congress, which means he is going to be a leader on that issue even though Obama has made it clear that any version he backs is going to be one inspired by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. – who is interested in appeasing the “law and order” types in ways that Gutierrez could care less about.

Gutierrez voted “yes” when health care reform came up last year in the House of Representatives, but now says he is considering a “no” vote if those immigration provisions remain.

At this point, it would be difficult to remove them and still pass something into law – unless one wants to scrap all the bills and start over, which is something that nobody wants to do. Dems want something now and GOPers don’t want anything ever.

THAT IS, NOT until we have Republican officials in control who can try to frame the issue from one of people not having health insurance to one of doctors making too much money for people to afford their services.

Gutierrez has made the rounds of the politically-oriented television programs, and has clarified his view, issuing a statement reading:

“At this time, I am a ‘no’ vote on health care. It’s no secret that I have been critical of proposals that would exclude our nation’s hard-working immigrants from the health care exchange, and I would find it extremely difficult if not impossible to vote for any measure that denies undocumented workers health care purchased with their own dollars.”

There are those political observers who want to say that Gutierrez is somehow being hyporcritical or absurd for being willing to support health care reform in one version, but then back away from supporting it now that it comes up for a final vote.

THERE ARE OTHERS who have a problem with the idea of him taking his primary issue of immigration and using it as a way of judging this issue of health care reform.

Personally, I have a problem with all of these political observers for being clueless as to the ways of real life. I would find it hypocritical of Gutierrez were to let this newest version of health care reform from the Senate go through without saying anything. Because it was put together in ways that were meant to dump on the bulk of Gutierrez’ constitutents – he represents the Illinois congressional district with a heavy Latino population, which is the true target of most anti-immigration measures.

So for him to bring this “flaw” up for public discussion is to be expected. Not that I’m convinced that this means he will remain a ‘no’ vote. Because for Gutierrez, the priority this year is getting action taken by Congress on something that resembles immigration reform – and not the type of reform that sees any benefit to erecting barricades along the U.S./Mexico border.

Could it be that Gutierrez’ price for a final “yes” vote on health care reform will be assurances that immigration reform will not be ignored this year (which is what many Latino activists – including several from Chicago and East Chicago, Ind., fear will happen, and likely will say when they gather on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., come March 21).

COULD IT BE that Gutierrez would only vote “no” if he senses that nobody is willing to do anything with the immigration issue? In which case, the health care reform version now pending would be nothing more than another kick to the cabeza for people with an interest on that issue.

If that is how the situation pans out, then perhaps a “no” vote is in the best interest of the people who have voted every two years since 1993 to send their former alderman to represent them in Washington.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: Luis Gutierrez is engaging in true-blue American politicking by trying to keep visible (http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/guitierrez-i-cant-support-health-care-bill-with-current-immigration-provisions.php) HIS priority issue in exchange for his support on Barack Obama’s desire for health care reform.

EXTRA: Illinois has a school in tourney

I got my chuckle from reading a commentary published in the Chicago Sun-Times bemoaning the fact that Illinois may not get any representation in the NCAA basketball tourney when the 65 qualifying Division I schools are announced this weekend.

Now I will agree with the point that many of the top high school ballplayers seem to be leaving the state when it comes to wanting to play college ball. It most likely is due to the fact that this state's college basketball programs are largely mediocre (DePaul University’s Final Four appearance of ’79 was such an aberration). I have a nephew who plays high school ball, and while I have heard him about wanting to play the game at higher levels, I have never heard him talk of thinking that being an SIU Saluki or a UI-Chicago Flame is anything special.

BUT I FIND it ridiculous that Illinois people have nobody from our state to root for. For I have been paying attention to the NCAA Division III for the past two weekends. Because that tourney doesn’t draw the big bucks from television ratings, officials are more concerned with playing the games as quickly as possible.

So as of Saturday, they’re already down to their Elite Eight. And I’m getting a kick out of my own collegiate alma mater, Illinois Wesleyan University, being among those 8 schools. Particularly after learning about their 77-72 victory Friday night over Carthage College (maybe that will shut up all those Redmen fans in Kenosha, Wis., because their team won the CCIW conference tourney and IWU qualified through an at-large bid).

One more victory, and IWU will be in the Final Four, with a chance to play for the national title in “scenic” Salem, Va. – although if one wants to think about it seriously, what makes Indianapolis, Ind. (the site of the Division I Final Four), any more luxurious?

So technically, we could all be rooting for the Titans of Bloomington (which the last time I looked at their roster included one Chicago kid and nine others from the suburbs) if we wanted some Illinois connection.

AS FOR THOSE of you who are about to get snotty with me and send me some sort of note proclaiming the inferiority of the lower classifications of college sports, I’d say the big difference is that you don’t get too many of the 7-footers, and you get the occasional kid who spent his life practicing his ball-handling skills, but whose growth spurt topped out at about 5-foot, 6-inches.

It’s still entertaining, and you do get the occasional NBA-quality player passing through (IWU fans still celebrate the 13-season career of Jack Sikma, mostly with the Seattle Supersonics), even though the one IWU game I made it to this season, I saw them play so sloppily when they lost 68-60 to the University of Chicago Maroons that they weren't worthy of any Sikma association that night.

It’s definitely a quality of ball good enough for people wishing to root for a home-state team. And does anyone really think that fans of the Chicago State Cougars basketball program have anything more to cheer about, just because their college’s enrollment is big enough to be classified Division I?

So for those of you who want to whine about there being nobody local to cheer for (and let’s be honest, even if the University of Illinois Fighting Illini do manage to qualify, they’ll probably be knocked out in the first round), I say, "Get real!"

THERE IS STILL somebody from this state to cheer for, although a part of my “joy” was dampened upon learning while writing this commentary that the IWU women’s basketball team lost 77-76 to the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, thereby bringing an end to the season for a team that was actually a favorite to win their tourney.

So while the rest of you will be bemoaning the lack of an Illinois or a Bradley in the college basketball tournaments, I’ll be the one anxiously following some quality games. Which means I’ll be the happy one in these days before the coming of the baseball season.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Why am I having fun from college basketball while many fans in this area are feeling nothing (http://www.suntimes.com/sports/2099019,illinois-schools-ncaa-12.article) but sorrow.

When local basketball fans get excited at the thought of playing in the NIT tourney (http://www.pantagraph.com/sports/college/illinois-state/article_17099d54-2d6c-11df-b688-001cc4c03286.html), you know it is a weak year.

I only hope that the IWU Titan season (http://www.d3hoops.com/) does not come crashing (http://www.iwusports.com/index.aspx?tab=basketball&path=mbball) to a halt Saturday night.

It is a wasted opportunity if Dems listen to Daley and back Turner for Lt. Governor

Mayor Richard M. Daley is usually the last politico who will make a public endorsement when an electoral office is up for grabs. So it kind of surprises me to learn that Daley this week made public who he thinks should get the Democratic Party’s nomination for lieutenant governor.

Of course, Daley went for the safe choice. The predictable choice. It’s Art Turner.

HE THINKS THE state representative from Chicago’s West Side ought to get the spot because he finished second in the six-candidate primary election held Feb. 2. In all fairness, Turner got about 20 percent of the votes cast in that primary – which makes him about as legitimate a nominee as Bill Brady, who took the GOP gubernatorial nomination with roughly the same percentage.

But that was the screwed up set of primaries – the voters who didn’t know anything about any of the candidates picked the ones who had enough personal wealth to get their names (if not any actual information about them) known to the public.

Hence, Democrats got the Chicago small business owner with some tawdry stories in his life saga. And the Republicans got the 27-year-old kid who may someday live up to his resume – even though he doesn’t yet.

When Scott Lee Cohen decided to back away from the Democratic nomination, it left the vacancy that the State Central Committee will have to resolve some time this spring.

FOR DALEY, IT is merely a matter of taking the second-place winner. He doesn’t want much more thought put into the process – perhaps because he’s afraid that his Democratic colleagues will screw things up even worse.

It is possible, although personally I think the people who should be griping are the Republican partisans. Democrats are going to get a chance at bolstering their candidate slate for the Nov. 2 general election by filling a “slot,” while Republicans are stuck with Jason Plummer of Edwardsville paired up with Bill Brady of Bloomington – a top-of-ticket that elicits nothing more than yawns among Chicago-area voters who comprise two-thirds of the state’s population.

Because I honestly think that if Democratic committeemen do nothing more than pick Turner on the grounds that he finished second, they are blowing a big opportunity.

And no, I don’t have the racial hangup that some people do about giving the nomination to Turner, which would mean that four of the six Democrats running for statewide constitutional offices would be African-American.

IT’S JUST THAT I would like to see something resembling a variety among the candidates, and this is a chance to enhance the ticket – which right now consists of two white Irish types, a Greek guy (let’s not forget Alexi Giannoulias) and three African-American officials – including long-time Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White.

I know that some political observers think the Democrats need to enhance the diversity of their ticket by picking someone who lives outside the Chicago area and who can appeal to the Anglo vote. Which is a concept that strikes me as being ridiculous.

How is “diversity” truly enhanced by picking a rural, white guy?

So what is it I want? Especially now that I am no longer even willing to pretend that I am a candidate for the Democratic nomination for lieutenant governor?

I’D LIKE TO see someone with a strong sense of ethicity. Giannoulias’ presence is nice in that regard, but there could always be more. And I’m not necessarily trying to promote the political future of a Latino government official.

It is with that thought in mind that I continue to take seriously the idea of Raja Krishnamoorthi as the lieutenant governor nominee. His Indian background would truly be a first in Illinois politics and he comes from Peoria – which adds something for those people who absolutely want a downstate Illinois address among the state government candidates.

He ran for the Democratic nomination for Illinois comptroller, losing to state Rep. David Miller, D-Lynwood. But his loss was a narrow one, not quite as close as Brady versus Kirk Dillard, but pretty close.

If we’re going to take the logic that a Second Place finisher ought to be entitled to something when a vacancy occurs, then Krishnamoorthi (who gained positive attention during the primary) is as legitimate a choice as Turner.

BESIDES, THE PRESENCE of Krishnamoorthi would go a long way toward undermining one lame point that Republicans are going to try to make throughout the primary – they are the party of ethnic diversity because their slate includes an Asian and a Latino.

It’s true.

The Republican running for Illinois attorney general is of Korean ethnicity, while the GOPer running for Illinois secretary of state originates from Honduras and also lived in Panama (even though he is not really an immigrant because he has had U.S. citizenship his whole life because of his parents).

My problem with this “logic” is that these particular candidates were picked to fill slots on the GOP ticket where none of the so-called “legitimate” Republicans were willing to take on either White or Lisa Madigan. I believe if Republicans thought either of those officials was vulnerable, they would have never allowed an ethnic candidate to get near the ballot.

REPUBLICANS WANT TO claim they have an Asian and a Latino? Democrats could respond by saying they have an Indian and a Greek, and ones who have more legitimate experience than the ethnic types trotted out by the Republican Party.

In short, this is an opportunity that I fear will be wasted by political people who can’t think beyond picking a legislator just because he has been friendly in the past with Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: For those who care, this is probably one of the few times that “Hizzoner, Jr.,” and “Mr. Speaker” (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/elections/ct-met-daley-turner-lt-gov-0311-20100310,0,4994427.story) agreed on something.

I probably am better qualified to be lieutenant governor than 99.99 percent of the people who seriously bothered (http://chicagoargus.blogspot.com/2010/02/maybe-i-should-run-for-lt-gov.html) to submit an application to the Illinois Democratic Party’s state central committee.

Legislators face a tough decision

Our political people in Springfield are going out of their way to avoid voting on anything that could be perceived as a tax increase. They don’t want to tick off voters come the Nov. 2 elections.

Yet I’m starting to wonder at what point will their refusal to do something about the serious financial problems this state confronts will come back to bite them in the tushy. For the fact is that the state’s shortfalls are causing struggles for many entities that rely on state funding to survive.

THUS FAR, STATE officials have lucked out.

Because many people are seeing cuts in programs they rely on, or are hearing their local school districts talk about making serious cuts in education, in order to balance their budgets with the lesser amounts of money the state is likely to give them during the upcoming school year.

I say state officials are lucky because the people see these cuts and seem to be blaming the local folks.

They’re assuming it is financial incompetence on the part of the local program officials, or school board officials who don’t have a clue what they are doing, that are causing these cuts to be made.

I HAVE LOST count of the number of times I have heard school superintendents make pleas to their local residents to call up their state legislator and complain about the activity in Springfield. All I know is that if that message ever does resonate with the public, there are going to be a whole lot of angry people marching on the Statehouse to complain.

That is a thought our Legislature ought to have kept in mind on Wednesday when Gov. Pat Quinn made (finally!) his budget address for the state fiscal year beginning July 1.

His past attempts to get the Legislature to approve something in the way of a tax hike to raise enough revenue to maintain government services (some of which people depend upon to survive) at adequate levels have failed.

So this year, he’s talking about the massive cuts to programs, which I wonder is just a scare tactic to get people to consider some alternative? I note that legislative officials already are saying Quinn’s budget proposal (which calls for $2.2 billion in spending cuts, mostly to education; taking out $5 billion in loans; and extending by an even more ridiculous time period the schedule by which government pays its bills) is dead.

YET I HAVE not heard of anyone offering a serious alternative – except for some talk of passing six-month budgets that would allow for any potentially negative vote to be taken in the weeks AFTER this year’s general election.

That’s just running away from the problem.

Yet so far, the legislators have been able to take cover in the fact that Illinois residents are quick to blame their local officials for the problems that are being imposed upon them by the state.

I do understand that the economic conditions causing these problems are unlike anything I have seen in recent decades. This is a unique situation – one that is going to require a unique solution if Illinois government is ever to become a worthy entity capable of providing for the many who rely upon it for various services.

I ALSO REALIZE that when I hear parents complain that their local school district is going to decimate itself by making severe cuts in the number of teachers, educational or extra-curricular activities or supplies, I do believe that no self-respecting school official would even consider making these cuts if they could avoid it.

So I do believe that some of the local hostility is irrational. These are conditions that are going to be dumped upon us, and there are going to be some people who will suffer as a result.

So I don’t blame local officials, or even Illinois legislators, for causing the situation, as much as I wonder why they’re so reluctant to take on the hard-nosed actions that will be required to resolve the problems.

I believe that part of the duty of an elected official is to make the tough decisions that aren’t always popular, but are necessary for our government to survive as a worthwhile entity. Because if it can’t provide, then we have to take the Libertarian sentiment into account and question why we even have it?

ONE OTHER POINT that I noticed recently. State Sen. Bill Brady, R-Bloomington, also the Republican nominee for governor, plans to campaign by claiming Quinn has mis-managed the whole situation and is wrong for thinking that additional revenue is a solution.

Yet Brady doesn’t seem to have the support of one-time Gov. Jim Edgar, who recently told WBEZ-FM that Brady’s proposed solutions were “naïve” and that he’s not campaigning for anybody come November.

Edgar is far from a radical and I recall his use of the no-tax hikes rhetoric during his two terms as governor. But if even he’s seeing that our political people are going to have to swallow some of the vile-tasting medicine being offered by Quinn to resolve this situation, we might have to take into account that it will have to happen.

Or else legislators will have to hope that Illinoisans don’t ever some to their senses and turn their disgust on the Statehousse for their inaction.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Pat Quinn is spewing a lot of “crazy talk,” as far as his government colleagues in the (http://www.suntimes.com/news/maxedout/2094100,CST-NWS-quinn10web.article) Legislature are concerned. Could it be that talk includes a little bit of truth?

Jim Edgar is going to maintain (http://www.chicagopublicradio.org/Content.aspx?audioID=40533) his silence this election cycle.

Everybody has an interest in census figures

Whether we want to admit it or not, there is a lot riding on those Census Bureau forms we’re all going to be asked to fill out some time next week.

There are some ethnic groups that are hoping to strengthen their overall influence in this country by getting as high a count as possible, while there are government entities that want to show they have as many people as possible so they can claim a larger share of funding provided by the federal government to local programs.

THERE EVEN ARE some ethnicities that are trying to bolster their influence by refusing to participate in the Census, in part on the grounds that they’re punishing the government entities that they think ignore them by holding down the overall count.

Hit them in the pocketbook, so to speak. A lesser population count threatens the amount of money that local governments receive. And the honest truth is that much of what local governments do is reliant upon the federal government to provide some money to help pay for it.

Personally, I’m skeptical such a strategy will work. And I’m not referring just to the overpublicized threat of a Latino Census boycott being pushed by a few ministers and other activists. I recently read an account by which Arabs in this country who are tired of being ignored were urged to ignore that Census form when it shows up in the mail – on the grounds that it really doesn’t matter.

I think that ignoring that Census form merely gives people in power more excuses to justify ignoring you. After all, if you weren’t counted, technically, you don’t exist.

ONE GROUP TRYING to persuade people to account for their newborn children on the Census form literally said that if your kid gets missed this time, it will be another decade before they can be acknowledged.

Not that government officials really care much about any of this. They just want the cash, which a study released Tuesday by the Washington-based Brookings Institute pointed out was rather substantial – particularly when it comes to the large metropolitan areas such as Chicago and its surrounding suburbs.

That study says that in 2008, governments in Illinois received $19.11 billion in federal funds for programs where the population count was a determining factor. Only California, New York and Texas got more.

Considering that the Chicago metropolitan area has become so dominant in Illinois’ population, it reasons that a large share ($12.68 billion) came to what is officially classified as the Chicago/Naperville/Joliet area. Only New York and Los Angeles got more.

OF COURSE, ALL of our counties all got significant amounts. Cook County received $10.11 billion (third highest in the nation for a county), while DuPage County also ranked in the Top 100 ($700.59 million, ranked 97th), while all the other Illinois and Indiana counties that comprise metro Chicago are in the Top 200.

At a time when our state and local governments are facing financial struggles of their own, I know for a fact that they’re all counting on getting every single dollar possible from the federal government in order to help balance out their budgets.

I have been hearing too many public school officials in recent weeks talking about their financial problems. The last thing they want to have to do is educate kids in their school districts whose family heads couldn’t be bothered to fill out a Census form.

They still have to, even if the amount of money they receive from federal education programs doesn’t truly reflect their population.

YOU MAY HAVE figured out by now after reading this commentary that I am something of a geek when it comes to the Census figures. When combined with reapportionment, I think they are the two most interesting stories that take place every decade.

Considering that both of these issues are going to occur in the next two years, I think we’re approaching an interesting time period – more interesting than this year’s elections which are going to be the usual partisan blather, along with a lot of cheap talk from Republicans about how they’re going to “save” the nation from ourselves.

Yawn. If you want to know the truth, what interest I do have in the elections is because I know that the winners will influence the partisan ties of the government officials who wind up using the Census figures compiled this year to put together those political maps that will be used throughout the 2010s.

I find these two issues interesting because they truly are about people.

THE CENSUS TELLS us how many we are and where we live. Then, the process of redistricting shows how those two factors can be twisted for political purposes. And when I say twisted, I fully acknowledge that both major political parties do the twisting.

Heck, even the Green Party would engage in political maneuvering, if they were in any position to do so.

But it all comes back to the Census, which I view similar to how I view voting. If you don’t vote, you lose your right to complain. If you don’t fill out that form and be counted, you might as well be saying you don’t exist. So you shouldn’t complain when the political powers-that-be decide to ignore you.

Personally, I want to exist so that when they try to ignore me, I will have every moral right to complain.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Somebody spent an absurdly large amount of time going through census tracts to (http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/reports/2010/0309_census_dollars/0309_census_report.pdf) try to compile this study.

Municipal officials around the nation (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-met-census-federal-funds-20100308,0,4724414.story) are going to be reviewing this study to try to determine how much more money they can get if they can provide a full and accurate population count.