Blagojevich style history revisionism

I must admit that I have yet to see an episode of “I’m a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here.” So I didn’t actually hear for myself when one-time Illinois first lady Patti Blagojevich referred to former state Treasurer Judy Baar Topinka as a “kooky old aunt.”

As I understand it, Blagojevich was trying to give an example of how her husband was noble and tolerated a “crazy” old lady who would do and say outrageous things. In theory, that is how her cast-mates on the reality television program should cope with one of their less-agreeable show mates.

IN REALITY, BLAGOJEVICH was the kooky one during that 2006 gubernatorial campaign who came up with those outrageous campaign spots that permanently put the image of Topinka dancing with 16627-424 (a.k.a., former Gov. George Ryan) into many of our minds.

Judy was the blunt-spoken one who was a little more down-to-earth than most political people. That’s not kooky, even if she is likely the only government official who would include jokes about flatulence in her Inauguration Day speech the way she did in 1995?

But a large part of what made Topinka different back when she was an elected official was that she wasn’t a typical run-of-the-mill Republican from the suburbs – even though she is a long-time resident of west suburban Riverside.

She didn’t fit the stereotype. That is what made her “kooky” in the minds of some political people, although to others.

WHEN I REMEMBER the Topinka I encountered during my years as a state government reporter-type, what comes to my mind was a person who actually showed some interest in her job.

She was a long-time state senator from Riverside who then went on to serve 12 years as Illinois treasurer. For the last four of those years, she was the lone GOP official to hold a statewide government post.

Most people who run for the low posts on the Illinois constitutional officers roll (state comptroller and treasurer) do so out of a sense that they are gaining experience for the day when they run for a higher-ranking office.

Current Illinois Comptroller Dan Hynes fits that mold perfectly, as does current state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias. I don’t doubt that they can handle some administrative duties to oversee the offices that pay state government bills and oversee state financial investments.

BUT TOPINKA (ALONG with one-time state Comptroller Dawn Clark Netsch) were among a type who actually went out of their way to understand government finances. In fact, there were times they could bore you to death with their knowledge of financial minutia.

Even in responding to Patti Blagojevich’s televised cheap shot, Topinka couldn’t help but point out to reporter-types that she “returned $230 million in unclaimed assets and made a profit.”

Another thing I remember about Topinka was that she was a woman who believed in bipartisanship, to a degree. I can recall the shock at one of her election victory parties when Cook County Board President John Stroger showed up. She invited him – even though he was a Democrat.

Like many Chicago Democratic political people, Topinka always had a strong sense of her ethnic background (from the Czech Republic). She never had the idea that ethnicity was something that needed to be erased in order to be a “real American.”

HER KOOKY IMPRESSION may have been tied to the notion that she would dig out the accordion and play along with polka bands on occasion. Of course, she never (to my knowledge) went on national television like then-presidential candidate Bill Clinton did with his saxophone on the Arsenio Hall Show.

Although I remember one time she appeared on a WFLD-TV morning show, and helped to review a film. But instead of giving it stars, she gave it accordions.

But Topinka had her loyalties to the Republican Party.

There was never a doubt of her being a GOP supporter. This is, after all, a woman who seriously believed that Phil Gramm was qualified to be president of the United States (back in 1996, although she was the only Illinois Republican of significance who thought so).

SO WHAT SHOULD we think of Patti Blagojevich’s attempt to inject some Chicago political tidbits into a reality television program?

I realize most people who bother to watch this show (I can’t bring myself to do so) won’t have a clue who Judy Baar Topinka is, and won’t care to find out.

But for those of us who do have a clue, I can’t help but think we will find it ridiculous, if not outright absurd, that Patti Blagojevich is calling anyone else “kooky.”

After all, she’s the wacky one who ate the tarantula on television.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: When characters on a reality television program perform prayers asking that “the truth will be revealed” about Rod Blagojevich, you know that something has seriously (http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=298836&src=143) gone awry.

Will it be as soon as next year that Judy Baar Topinka has to revise the front page of her website (http://www.judybarrtopinka.com/), particularly the line about how she is, “the last Republican to be elected to a statewide office in Illinois.”

Can’t afford the death penalty? We’re keeping it, says the state’s attorney

Put the Cook County Public Defender’s office in the category of people who gave something a nice effort, but never had a chance at being taken seriously.

Their “something” was the death penalty. The office that defends criminal defendants who can’t afford an attorney (they are entitled to legal representation, that’s the American Way) argued against capital punishment in Illinois by claiming they don’t have enough money to handle all the cases of indigent county jail inmates who are facing a possible death sentence.

THEY WOULD HAVE liked an abolition of the capital crimes statute in Illinois. But they were willing, they said earlier this week, to settle for having prosecutors in Cook County say they would not seek a death sentence against anyone.

At least not until the county budget situation gets squared away.

To that notion, the state’s attorney basically laughed. They argued in response that no one gets to tell the prosecutors what charges they seek against a defendant, and that a lack of money is not a good enough reason.

There are, they say, ways of juggling a government budget that would shortchange other services and cases handled by the public defender’s office – all to ensure that Illinois keeps up the appearance of having a viable death penalty.

IF IT SEEMS to you like I think the prosecutors for Cook County seem a little too determined to keep a capital crimes statute, you’d be reading me correctly.

The reality of the situation is that we don’t have a death penalty in Illinois. Executions are not being carried out, and not just because all of the condemned inmates in Illinois prisons are years away from having their mandatory criminal appeals run out and having a “death date” scheduled for their execution by lethal injection.

We still have the moratorium imposed by former Gov. George Ryan (be honest, that is a big part of why some people detest him as much as they do – regardless of how much they talk about “dead kids”), maintained by Rod Blagojevich and kept in place by Pat Quinn.

Even if someone were to have their legal appeals run their course (we’re likely about a decade from having that happen in Illinois), there still would be no execution scheduled.

THE REALITY OF our daily situation with the Illinois criminal justice system is that we have abolished the death penalty. It is not a daily reality. The sooner our General Assembly comes to its senses and changes law to reflect reality, the better off we’d be.

One reason we’d be better off is that death penalty cases do cost more money, both to the court system and to the Illinois Corrections Department. Condemned inmates have to be kept under higher security, and their appeals are all required.

The courts must hear them at every step. It’s all part of the safety mechanism we have to try to keep innocent people from actually being put to death.

Even at the trial stage, there are so many mandatory legal issues that must be heard (it’s not just a simple case of, “Did he do it?”) that the trials wind up costing more to conduct. The defense for such inmates is more expensive, unless a defense attorney tries to do a shoddy job (in which case, the inmate would win on appeal on grounds he had incompetent legal counsel at his trial).

THAT IS WHAT the public defender’s office tried arguing this week, only to have their concerns ignored. They can’t afford to properly defend the people whom they are being asked to represent at their death penalty trials.

To take the attitude that lack of money is not a good enough reason is so callous.

It almost comes across as someone who doesn’t particularly care if a criminal defendant gets a shoddy trial. Perhaps they think they have a “tough on crime” mentality by taking the side of the prosecution against the defense.

But I’d argue they’re setting the stage for a whole batch of defendants having their death sentences (if not their convictions outright) overturned.

THAT WOULD MEAN we’d have to re-do a whole batch of this year’s death penalty cases at some future date. That adds to the overall expense.

Out of fear of trivializing the issue, it kind of reminds me of what some people say when it comes to professional baseball and the constant struggle of low-budget teams competing against rich teams.

Back when players and teams in the 1970s set up the system of arbitration by which contract disputes were settled by a third party, one thing low-budget teams learned was that their “alleged” inability to pay big salaries was NOT considered a legitimate reason to hold back a talented ballplayer’s salary.

It sounds like the argument being offered up this week by officials of the state’s attorney’s office to reporter-types

THE END RESULT for baseball became a system where some teams perpetually stink because they have to get rid of any quality athletes they find because they can’t afford to keep them for the long-term.

While I realize the parallel isn’t perfect, I have to wonder if Cook County is destined to become the equivalent of the Kansas City Royals – a once-great team that can’t maintain anything for the long-term because they don’t have the money.

Not paying attention to finances causes some teams long-term problems. I’d hate to think the county criminal justice system will face similar situations because some people are determined to have the appearance of a death penalty.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: Does new Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill., have the right idea (http://www.chicagopublicradio.org/Content.aspx?audioID=34632) when it comes to the death penalty in Illinois?

Taylor a throwback to old Chicago

I saw blues singer Koko Taylor perform several times during my life, but the occasion I recall most vividly occurred in a place far removed from the South Side atmosphere that her rough, rugged voice brought to mind.

It was at Illinois State University, the Normal-based college that was within walking distance of my own alma mater – Illinois Wesleyan. Back in what was most likely 1984, Taylor and her Blues Machine band was earning a living performing the blues, and they gave a concert on the college campus.

WHAT MAKES THAT event stick so strongly in my mind is the fact that I literally got a front row center seat. I was probably about 10 feet away from her in what was a packed (several hundred, maybe up to 1,000 people) hall of people whose idea of a study break was to spend a Saturday night listening to Koko giving us her take on “Wang Dang Doodle” and other blues songs.

Now I don’t listen to the blues as much as I used to back in college. I still have all my old LPs of Taylor’s music, but the most recent recordings on CD are ones I haven’t gotten around to buying yet.

But back in the days when I did manage to blow much of my spare cash on music and recordings, I remember that a Koko Taylor record was always more valued than some of the other stuff that passes for blues these days.

I still own some of my old vintage recordings of music by artists such as Muddy Waters, Magic Sam and B.B. King (who once gave us a recorded concert performed from our very own Cook County Jail).

BUT THERE WAS always a difference between listening to something like “I Just Wanna Make Love to You” by Muddy Waters, and anything recorded by someone like “Lil Ed and the Blues Imperials.”

Whether it was in the writing of the songs or just the fact that so much of life and our society has changed that no one could possibly come up with a song like “Hoochie Coochie Man” these days, the modern-day “bluesmen” all too often sound like a parody of the real thing.

Too much worried about getting the right “sound” to their guitar solo, rather than trying to catch the earthy feeling that is what makes the blues legitimate.

That is what always, to my ear, made Koko Taylor unique.

THE LADY FROM Tennessee who followed the migration of black people from the South to the South Side and who once was the cleaning woman for rich white people (who probably had no clue of her “night” job and its cultural significance) was one of the few blues singers I ever heard who had a sense of the real earthy feel that used to be heard in clubs all throughout Bronzeville some 70 years ago.

None of the guitar-oriented nonsense that can overwhelm a true blues singer, which at its best should be some of the simplest music played.

And definitely none of that bleached out sound that too often comes from listening to white rock ‘n’ roll types trying to play the blues because they like the guitar sound.

I’d rather hear Muddy Waters any day than any of the cover versions recorded back in the 1970s by Led Zeppelin or Eric Clapton – even though I know of people who feel just the opposite (they view the newer versions of the songs as “polished and improved” versions – I say they’re nuts).

THE WORST PEOPLE, in this regard, are the ones who think that “the Blues Brothers” film had anything to do with blues music. My reason for getting into that film is seeing the grittiness of a now-gone Chicago on film. The music itself is too pop oriented at times.

No one would ever call Koko Taylor’s music polished or pop. And that was its beauty.

What made her special is that she was still with us even into the 21st Century, giving us a taste of what used to echo from clubs along East 43rd Street (the old Checkerboard Lounge) back in the first third of the 20th.

Plus, she was still in her prime physically until recent years. So we got to hear the earthiness of the blues at its best.

THAT WAS PARTICULARLY rare. I can claim to have seen both Muddy Waters and John Lee Hooker perform live. But by the time I saw them in the 1980s, they were old men who didn’t sound anything close to what they were in their prime.

Seeing Hooker, in particular, was like listening to one of those oldies revival tours, with bands such as the Buckinghams trying to pretend they can turn the calendar back some 40 years. In Hooker’s case, he was trying to go back about 60 years, and it wasn’t convincing.

It made me wish I could have seen him in his prime. But in the case of Koko, I got to see and hear her in her prime.

Those occasions will be among the moments I recall of an older Chicago likely for the rest of my life.

NOW EXCUSE ME while I walk over to my turntable (I still own a functioning one) and put on my copy of “Queen of the Blues.” (And I don’t want to hear arguments about how I ought to own the CD instead).

At this particular moment (which is about one day after I first learned Taylor died following complications from surgery performed a couple weeks ago), I think I need a jolt of “Queen Bee” to brighten my day.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: Listen and learn for yourself about the musical career of the late (http://www.kokotaylor.com/index.html) Koko Taylor.

HANDGUNS: Now the courts must decide

It should have been a legal “slam-dunk” that the appeals courts would uphold Chicago city government’s ban on firearms within the city limits.

After all, the limited government conservatives who always want to rant about the right of a government to set its own standards theoretically ought to support the idea of letting a city impose limits on firearms.

FROM A PURELY practical standpoint, firearms in places where people are packed (just under 3 million in the city proper) don’t make sense. It’s not like anyone is hunting for their food if they live in Beverly or Sauganash.

Yet the rigidity with which the far right wants to impose some rural definition of when a firearm makes sense upon the entire nation (even those of us who deliberately reject a rural mentality by not living there) and the willingness of some segments of the courts to cater to those people have always made any case involving firearms to be up in the air.

It’s almost as bad as abortion the degree to which people will hop into their partisan rhetoric mode whenever the issue comes up.

So I must admit to being pleasantly surprised when I learned that the federal appeals court for the Seventh Circuit (based in Chicago) issued a ruling this week that upholds the laws the City Council and then-Mayor Jane Byrne imposed back in the early 1980s that pretty much made possession of a firearm a crime.

WHAT IT USUALLY amounts to is an additional charge that can be tacked on to someone when they are arrested for some other crime.

Under the law, people who had properly registered firearms prior to the imposition of the law could remain legal, but I remember from my police-reporter days with the old City News Bureau being told by Chicago police of just how few legal weapons there were in Chicago.

Of course, we now have the firearms advocates claiming they’re going to take this issue to the Supreme Court, which ultimately will have to decide how the nation as a whole perceives this issue.

I’m just wondering how long until the firearms advocates start trying to taint Sonia Sotomayor with this issue – claiming she will keep the balance of the Supreme Court from being a majority in their favor (there already have been some people claiming the appeals court judge from New York is not properly appreciative of firearms).

OF COURSE, WE’RE talking about a woman who grew up in the inner city of the Bronx. She might have a differing perspective of urban violence and the need to try to reign it in than would someone who wants to view the nation as a giant rural open field with no neighbors around for miles.

What ultimately is at stake in this issue isn’t so much the act of physically owning a firearm. It is going to be an issue of just what does it mean when the federal government passes a law.

Because the logic used by the appeals court in Chicago to rule in favor of the municipal ban on firearms was that the previous ruling by an appeals court in the District of Columbia is restricted solely to areas controlled by the federal government.

It goes back to the fact that Washington, D.C. is not a normal city. It is a federal district and is operated by people in Congress who at times could care less about the people who live there year around.

BY THAT LOGIC, the Chicago municipal firearms ban would not apply on property in the city maintained for the federal government.

In theory, you could take your pistol into the Dirksen or Kluczynski federal buildings or the post office, but not into City Hall, the Thompson Center or any other building.

Except that I would guess the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s office would have their own qualms about anyone trying to bring a pistol into their office buildings or one of the federal courtrooms maintained in town.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court is going to have to decide this issue, because we now have an instance where the federal courts based in Chicago are in disagreement with those of the District of Columbia. The high court will have to pick a side.

I’M NOT GOING to claim to know how they will ultimately rule. The legal appeal the high court will be asked to decide hasn’t even been filed yet.

I’m sure the firearms advocates will try to make an issue out of the fact that it is a federal appeals court in Obama’s adopted home town of Chicago that is somehow behind the problem. They will claim that if only the whole country would adopt their interpretation of the Second Amendment to the Constitution (which I read to mean that people have a right to have a firearm only for the possibility that they might have to cooperate as a militia for the national defense), then all would be right with the world.

Except that it wouldn’t.

Because the fact is that this is one issue where we are not of a single mindset, and conditions are not universal.

PERHAPS THE IDEA of an outright ban on owning a pistol would be nonsensical in Butte, Mont., or even East Peoria, Ill.

But in Chicago or other urban areas where there are the flare-ups of violence that make people uneasy, perhaps it makes some sense.

After all, it’s not like anyone is arguing that the residents of Kennesaw, Ga., should be banned from owning a firearm just because Chicago residents are, no more than Kennesaw’s long-standing requirement that residents own firearms ought to have any bearing on what Chicago does.

-30-

Why not a Chicago ‘date night?’

I’m outraged over the concept of President Barack Obama choosing to take a day trip to New York City last weekend so he and first lady Michelle could have dinner and catch a Broadway show.

No, I’m not going to spew the ridiculous rhetoric of the right, which is trying to claim that Obama is some sort of elitist because he took one of the official government airplanes (albeit, not Air Force One – that would be gaudy) for the trip from Washington to JFK International Airport, before being flown into Manhattan by helicopter.

WHAT THEY'RE REALLY upset about is the fact that we don’t have a “President McCain” these days (although I suspect some of them really wanted us to have a “President Huckabee”). So they’re going to nitpick every single detail of the Obama administration to try to make it sound like something more significant than it truly is.

The simple fact is that a president of the United States is an expensive concept to maintain. The constant security required to ensure that no one can successfully take a shot at him (or someday, her) requires certain measures that would seem excessive to the daily routine of a Joe Schmo.

So unless we expect our nation’s president to live within a White House that is turned into a fortress (erect a few turrets with cannons, ready to fire upon anyone who gets with 100 yards of the front gates), we are going to have to expect the high-security measures.

That includes using a government-owned airplane to give the Obamas a private flight to New York. I couldn’t begin to imagine how stressful it would be on the Secret Service to ensure the security of a commercial flight if anyone seriously tried to put the first couple on the D.C. to New York shuttle.

AND I'M NOT some type who wants to think that anything associated with Broadway is somehow elitist (even though I will be the first to admit I have never understood the appeal of NASCAR, and likely never will).

So if the Obamas want to have dinner, then catch a show (for the record, they went to see “Joe Turner’s Come and Gone” at the Belasco Theater), the concept doesn’t bother me much in theory.

The problem I have with the idea is the fact that they went to New York, which I do understand is just a short flight from the District of Columbia. But what about Chicago?

We have our own fledgling theater district in this city, along with many world renowned restaurants. What would have been wrong with the first couple choosing to come back “home” for a weekend? I’d think that could have been just as relaxing.

I SEEM TO recall once that a then-President-elect Obama said he likely would try to return to Chicago on a regular basis, similar to how the former President George W. Bush had his pseudo-ranch in Crawford, Texas (actually more of a luxury house in a rural town) that he could travel to whenever he felt the need to get away from D.C.

Obama himself made a comment that Chicago was, in a sense, his “oxygen,” as though he couldn’t survive without a dose of the Second City on a regular basis.

Apparently, our air has become polluted. Since his inauguration, we have had one Valentine’s Day-type Obama appearance in Chicago (even though I’m sure the residents of the Hyde Park neighborhood probably find it relaxing not to have the Secret Service watching their every move just because they happen to live near the Obama residence).

But what could have been wrong with having the first couple come back to Chicago for that weekend – except that Malia and Sasha likely would have taken it as a personal slight that they were not included in a quick trip back to the city for a couple of days.

SO NOW, WHEN Obama needs his “quick” getaway, he and Michelle hightail it for a restaurant in Greenwich Village.

I’m just wondering if this is the first stage of the Obamas thinking their lifelong goal is to live in “the Big Apple.” It doesn’t matter if neither of them has any real ties to that city (even if the president himself got his bachelor’s degree from Columbia University). Our top officials have a knack for adopting New York as their home after they leave office.

One needs to look no further than the Clintons. Bill of Arkansas and Hillary Rodham of suburban Park Ridge didn’t give thought to either of those places as a home when their time in the White House ended in early 2001.

If not for the ridiculously high cost of living in Manhattan, they’d be a part of that whole scene – instead of having the big house in the suburbs that puts them close enough to the scene to feel comfortable.

THERE ALSO IS Richard Nixon, who in between being vice president under Dwight Eisenhower and having his own term-and-a-half as president moved to New York and became an attorney with incredible political connections.

I would hope that this “date night” was just a mild flirtation with the New York scene, and not the initial step in trying to reincarnate their image as urban hipsters who think nothing of significance exists west of Connecticut.

Now I realize that, for all practical purposes, the Chicago portion of Obama’s life is over.

He’s never again going to be one of the local politicals. His daughters are going to be largely D.C.-educated. Their days in Chicago schools (albeit private ones) are over. Even if he does decide to return to the city once his term (if not two) as president is complete, he will be the awkward presence of the Second City.

A PART OF me would not be surprised if the Obamas decide that their mini-mansion in Hyde Park (the one enhanced with the extra yard space provided courtesy of Antoin Rezko, remember him?) is a part of their past. A part of me wonders if a Hawaii retirement is in their future, but that is subject matter for future commentary.

But I always figured that day was to come some time in the future. As a Chicago buff, it’s sad to see that it may have already arrived.

-30-

Quinn, leaders to fix state budget mess

Illinois' budgetary problems will shift to the Thompson Center come Thursday. Photograph provided by State of Illinois.

When all is said and done, there was no point to having the rank-and-file membership of the Illinois General Assembly at the Statehouse this weekend. All the financial talk and countdown to 12:01 a.m. Monday was a waste.

Because the mess that is the Illinois government budget is going to get resolved the way it always does – through a back-room deal cut by the governor and the “Four Tops.”

THAT MEANS THE four legislative leaders will all get equal say (even the Republican leaders). That’s the price the Democrats will have to pay for not being able to ram through a deal on their own before the Monday deadline.

And it means that we’re going to see just how much of a goo goo (good government type) Pat Quinn truly is.

Because as things stand now, the Illinois General Assembly took a pass on its responsibility to approve a balanced budget for government to operate with for the 2011 fiscal year (the one that begins July 1 of this calendar year).

Quinn was totally correct when he laughed derisively at the notion that an unbalanced budget be signed into law now, and that the General Assembly could come back to the Statehouse in November to try to fix the mess.

ONLY AMONG POLITICAL people would one find a group that thinks they should be credited with meeting a deadline, even though the actual work they were supposed to accomplish was left uncompleted.

So now, we’re reduced to negotiations.

Quinn met with the legislative leaders at his Statehouse office (the one that was covered with several layers of dust because former occupant Rod Blagojevich rarely set foot in there) on Monday.

About all that came out of those sessions was an agreement to resume talks on Thursday – only those talks will take place in the governor’s office at the Thompson Center building in Chicago (the office that was once taped off by the FBI as a potential crime scene while federal investigators looked for evidence against Blagojevich).

I SUPPOSE THE fact that they agreed to bother resuming talks again later this week means that no one said anything to blatantly offend someone else. They’re still talking.

But it also means that we’re no closer to knowing how the state plans to plug the billions-of-dollars shortfall it faces in the state budget for the upcoming fiscal year – even though Quinn told reporter-types he is hopeful there will be some sort of solution by July 1.

That is the new drop-dead date (as opposed to Sunday’s drop-dead date that turned out to be phony). For if state officials remain as clueless on July 1 as they are now, we then face the notion of having state government shut down.

We also face the chance of severe cuts being made to government programs – which would mean that services that some people have come to depend upon in their lives (such as medical care) will be cut.

TO THAT END, the Capitol Fax newsletter reported Monday that Quinn said he is having notices sent out informing social service groups that receive state funding to maintain their programs that they may lose their money in 30 days.

That ultimately is the problem with the people who spew rhetoric about wanting to take a narrow-minded “just make cuts” approach to the problem. It is similar to the reason why it is wrong to think of government operations as just a business.

Government can’t fail and go bankrupt. It must be propped up because it provides some services necessary to maintain our society. Thinking you can just make cuts is the cowardly way out of the problem.

So what happens now?

I DON’T KNOW. I’m sure that the General Assembly will eventually return to the Statehouse for one day, where they will be asked to vote on a proposal that makes some cuts in program funding while also imposing some sort of tax that the anti-tax types will want to demonize as the end of civilization as we know it.

A lot of legislators are going to be asked by their leaders to vote in favor of a measure they despise. All of them will find one tiny aspect of the plan they can tolerate, and will proceed to spin that aspect into something significant to make it seem like their vote is somehow responsible.

Which means that the terms of this deal is what is being negotiated by Quinn and the legislative leaders.

Some might think it totally appropriate for Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, to come up with such a deal, along with the descendant of the Cullerton family who now runs the Illinois Senate.

AS FOR THE Republican leaders of the state Senate and Illinois House respectively, Christine Ragodno, R-Lemont, and Tom Cross, R-Oswego, they will be so thankful to be suddenly relevant after going all spring not having their opinions account for much of anything that they will wind up getting caught in the deal as well.

And Quinn the good government type is going to have to cut a political deal – one that is going to hurt some people no matter how it turns out.

That is what I find to be most ironic about this whole situation. It may very well be Quinn who is behaving the most responsibly these days – accepting the idea of a significant tax hike during tough economic times and refusing to merely do what is politically expedient (such as signing an unbalanced budget with a promise of fixing it a few months from now).

But in the end, those same legislative leaders who now are crafting this deal with Quinn will wind up turning on him – calling it the Quinn budget and insisting that he receive full blame for anyone whose interests are harmed by whatever political deal is agreed upon in future weeks.

-30-

When should state’s fiscal year end?

It’s times like now that I wonder if anyone wishes the Illinois General Assembly had never made the change to bring their business to a close by the end of May, rather than the old days when the state Legislature had until June 30 to complete its business.

Because of the way the laws operate, the General Assembly had pressure on it to approve a balanced budget for state government for the upcoming fiscal year while also trying to figure out how to close the potential shortfall totaling in the billions of dollars.

AN INCOME TAX hike? Sales taxes on all kinds of differing services? More casinos and other legalized gambling, which would make completely legal many of the activities that sheriffs across the state now do to show they’re protecting our morality?

The legislature had until 11:59 p.m. Sunday to figure it out, because the moment that the clock ticked Midnight, Illinois would regard it as Monday, June 1. That is the legal deadline by which the lawmakers are supposed to be complete.

Nobody wants to go through the ordeal of 1988 when the clock suddenly stopped at 11:59 p.m. on June 30 so that the deal to have the state construct what is now known as U.S. Cellular Field could pass with a simple majority (some hard-core ranters insist to this day that the White Sox deal passed illegally at 12:03 a.m. on July 1). Back in the days of this early 20th Century postcard, this weekend's legislative headaches wouldn't have occurred for another month.

If they’re not, they face the penalty of needing a larger majority (60 percent) in order to approve anything that needs to take effect immediately.

IN SHORT, THE same legislators who can’t even get a simple majority would have to get even more people to agree. And the Democrats who can’t agree on anything among themselves would now have to make serious concessions to Republican legislators to get some of their support.

The only reason I can’t hear your chuckling at the thought of bipartisan compromise in today’s political world is because it’s being drowned out by my own hysterical laughter.

It wasn’t always like this.

There used to be a time when May 31 was just another date. Those were the days when the General Assembly configured its schedule each year so that June 30 would be the scheduled end of the spring legislative session.

I WAS ONE of the reporter-types at the Statehouse in Springpatch back when the change was made to move things up one month. And I remember the real reason for this change.

“Pate” Philip wanted it that way.

That is one-time Illinois Senate President James “Pate” Philip, R-Wood Dale, who went through his career on the Statehouse scene thinking it a waste that the Legislature couldn’t have the entire summer back in their home districts.

So when he worked his way up to the leadership position in the 1990s, one of the changes he got the General Assembly to make was to shift the legislative schedule. Instead of having a state Legislature work from mid-March through June, they now work roughly from late January through May.

The amount of time lawmakers spend at the Statehouse is similar. It is just done at a slightly different time of the year.

BUT IF THINGS were done the way they used to be in Springfield, Sunday would not have been a “drop dead” date. Heck, legislators wouldn’t have even been in Springfield on Sunday.

The “work around the clock every day of the week and weekend” period that comes at the end of every legislative session would be about three weeks off.

Now as I noted earlier in this commentary, June 30 used to be the relevant date. It wasn’t until July 1 that the higher majority for approval would kick in.

To my mind, there was a logic to that date – one that will always exist and that can never apply to May 31.

FOR ILLINOIS GOVERNMENT operates on a calendar from July 1 through June 30. As far as the people at the Statehouse and at the Thompson Center in Chicago are concerned, 2010 has only 30 days remaining.

What we will think of as the coming of Independence Day holiday weekend will be thought of by state government junkies as New Year’s Day and the beginning of 2011.

That was the reason for the higher standard for approving measures. It was to discourage people from trying to do “this year’s” business in the early moments of “next year.” It made sense to respect June 30 as something significant.

By comparison, May 31 is just another date on the calendar. It’s a shame that it has gained any significance and caused our legislators some pressure.

NOT THAT I expect anyone to seriously think of restoring the Legislature’s deadline to June 30. I’d sooner expect the National League to voluntarily implement the Designated Hitter rule.

But it would be nice to know that there was one more month of time to try to seriously review the state’s financial problems – rather than try to cram some sort of makeshift political solution that accomplishes nothing for the public good.

Be honest. That is what will happen this year, regardless of what the Legislature winds up doing. As of when I’m writing this commentary Sunday night, I don’t know how the situation will be resolved. I doubt the legislators do either.

Of course, there is one possibility.

THAT OUR LEGISLATORS are so worthless that not even one more month would accomplish anything, except us having this exact same discussion on June 30 instead of May 31.

You may be right about that assumption. But that is a subject for future commentary.

-30-

EDITOR'S NOTE: Any attempt by me to come up with a detailed analysis of whatever half-cocked attempt at compromise the General Assembly wound up approving late Sunday while sitting at a laptop computer some 200 miles away would have been absurd. If you really need to know the details of whether or not the Legislature was able to do anything and finish "the people's business" for the spring, check out Capitol Fax (http://thecapitolfaxblog.com/).