For Ill. government, it’s time to play another episode of, “Who’s to Blame?”

I almost feel like I’m a kid again watching daytime TV and one of those tacky old game shows. Maybe “Let’s Make a Deal” with Monty Hall – the only thing is that we, the people of Illinois, are the ones getting “zonked.”

RAUNER TO LEGE: Back to Springfield?!?

Remember the “zonk,” the booby prizes that were hidden away amidst the real gifts, and if one wasn’t careful they’d give up that all-expenses paid trip to Hawaii and get stuck with something like a rotted, old Model T Ford.

THAT’S WHAT I feel like we’re about to get hit with in Illinois, what with the way the ongoing battle over a state budget has managed to find a way of continuing on – a sequel, so to speak.

When the General Assembly approved a budget that Gov. Bruce Rauner tried to veto – only to have the legislators override him – there was one piece of the puzzle that was put aside.

It was the measure that outlines the portion of state funding provided for public education. Known this year as Senate Bill 1 (nice symbolism), it has been approved by the General Assembly, but hasn’t been formally sent to Rauner for his consideration.

With the budget approved, the money for the schools for state Fiscal Year 2018 exists. But without the separate bill’s approval, it hasn’t been settled how it will be allocated.

SO UNTIL THAT happens, the schools remain unsettled. Having talked with a few school administrators in recent weeks, I know they are wary of what could happen. They know there is a possibility the state funding that local school districts rely upon for their operating expenses could get caught up in a partisan political squabble.

Now the reason why the General Assembly’s leadership (ie., Democrats, as in Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago) are holding off on sending the bill along to Rauner is that the governor has already made clear his intentions.

MADIGAN: How little could Lege do?

Veto!!!!!

The governor objects to provisions included in the bill to have the state try to make sense of the mess that is the pension program for retired Chicago Public School teachers. Dems representing Chicago interests don’t want to give Rauner a chance to issue such a veto.

INSTEAD, THEY WANT to hold off on giving him a chance to act until later this summer, when the beginning of the new school year (about mid-August for most districts) will be so imminent that the governor would feel the pressure to back off his veto threat.

Rauner, of course, is on what he’s calling his “downstate tour” of rural municipalities where he’s going about claiming the bill is nothing but a “Chicago bailout” and that all he’s trying to do is provide a little extra funding for the school districts in those rural communities.

The usual urban vs. rural, or Chicago vs. the rest of Illinois brawl that all too often is what issues devolve down to in this state.

To Rauner, it’s greedy Chicago trying to stall things, while I know from my talks with those local school officials they’re going to be more than willing to “Blame Bruce!” if something occurs that causes state aid payments to schools to be delayed so long that the public schools won’t be able to open on time.

ONE INTERESTING MOVE is that the governor is now saying he’s giving the General Assembly until Monday at Noon to send him that bill so he can veto it – or else he’s prepared to issue the order for a special session.

Is this what Ill. in for in coming days?

Meaning back to Springfield for the legislators, as though he thinks a dose of “Capital punishment” (ie., having to spend time in Springfield during the otherwise lazy days of summer) will force the rank-and-file of the General Assembly to hand him the bill.

Of course, we saw during the final weeks of the budget debacle that just because the Legislature is in session doesn’t mean they’re doing anything meaningful. It’s only when the two sides come together that things get done, and Rauner is making it clear he’s not coming together with anybody.

So if the General Assembly winds up back at the Statehouse next week, why do I suspect we’ll get a lot more action on measures such as the one approved earlier this month that renamed a portion of Interstate 55 for former President Barack Obama? At a time when we have serious issues to address, that would be our “zonk!”

  -30-

How far he’s come

I couldn’t get away from the image of Tony LaRussa on Monday. Everywhere I looked, he says he’s retiring from professional baseball.

He doesn’t want to return as manager of the St. Louis Cardinals. He figures that after parts of six decades as a player and manager, being able to say he won a World Series is the perfect way for it all to end.

HE MAY WELL be right. Although I’m convinced his “retirement” is about as legitimate as those of Ryne Sandberg or Michael Jordan – although he may well be telling the truth that he won’t be field manager of the Cardinals any more.

But for those people who engage in conspiracy theories that have LaRussa returning to the Chicago White Sox in some sort of front-office role (possibly as some sort of vague-titled adviser to team chairman Jerry Reinsdorf), I can only think of the words of Chico Escuela whenever sports other than beisbol came up.

“I don’t know.”

But what I do know is that watching LaRussa leave on top – with sports reports citing the fact that all he’d need to do is manage a team to 35 more victories (about half the total the Cubs usually win in a single season) and he’d be able to say that his major league managerial record surpassed that of the great New York Giants manager John McGraw – just makes it all the more humorous to me how far down he once was on the baseball totem pole.

THE ULTIMATE FAILURE. A ballplayer whose skills might have been good enough for occasional stints with the Kansas City Athletics and Chicago Cubs, but whose real level of talent was to be a regular for ball clubs like the Denver Bears, the New Orleans Pelicans or the Iowa Oaks (none of which exist any longer).

A career “minor leaguer” who may well have gotten the White Sox managerial job in 1979 (replacing player/manager Don Kessinger) because then-owner Bill Veeck thought he was someone who would do what he was told and wouldn’t get in the way of Veeck’s promotional schemes.

A man who was so anonymous that he once appeared on a late 1970s attempt to reincarnate the “To Tell the Truth” television game show – and nobody had a clue who he was!

I still remember watching that program when it aired – only by pure chance. I had just finished some high school homework and was flipping around the pre-cable TV dial when I stumbled onto the start of the show.

WATCHING ACTOR NIPSEY Russell’s alleged “gotcha” moment, thinking he had caught one of the people in a lie because “they don’t play night games” in Chicago made me laugh – what a buffoon, getting the city’s two ball clubs confused.

And being able to use the Internet to find a video clip of that show made me laugh when listening to LaRussa explain at the end that his law school degree had nothing to do with baseball, but gave him a “cushion” to fall back on in the event he got fired as manager.

Of course, as we all know now, LaRussa never did fall back on practicing law for a living.

He did eventually get fired by the White Sox in 1986 (as all managers eventually do). There are those who will forevermore condemn Ken Harrelson’s one year as team general manager because he was the one who replaced LaRussa (although there are other White Sox fans who will be forevermore grateful that their favorite team got rid of the arrogant bum).

WHICH SET THE stage for him to lead those Oakland Athletics ballclubs that won three straight American League championships (along with the “Earthquake” World Series of 1989), then go on to the St. Louis Cardinals – when he was in charge when Mark McGwire hit all those home runs, then won three National League championships in the past decade.

Along with two World Series titles in 2006 and 2011 – the latter of which he wants to be his “last hurrah” in baseball.

Quite a ways ahead of that day some three decades ago when LaRussa had to answer with a straight face from actress Kitty Carlisle if he was allowed to “spank” ballplayers as a way of disciplining them.

For the record, the LaRussa method of ballplayer discipline was, “You can talk to them. You can take their money.”

IN SHORT, THIS television appearance was one that has repeatedly popped into my head throughout the years – just about every single time that someone went on a diatribe about what a baseball “genius” this LaRussa guy was.

I remember him when he was a nothing just thankful to be sticking around in baseball – rather than actually having to use the knowledge obtained from that law degree.

Then again, this “nothing” was the manager of the first Chicago ballclub that ever finished a regular season in first place and went on to the playoffs. You have to go back to the pre-playoff old days to find Chicago pennant winners – except for Ozzie Guillen and 2005.

So let’s hear it for LaRussa. Now, we can begin the speculation about what does he really mean by “retire.” And will Chicago have a place in his post-managerial baseball career?

  -30-