We get a state budget; legislators get pay raises. Ideologues get a migraine

Bruce Rauner really is gone. We truly are in a new era of state government.

PRITZKER: Signed a budget a month early?

For Gov. J.B. Pritzker didn’t even wait a full week before giving approval to a budget for Illinois’ Fiscal Year 2020 – which begins July 1.

PRITZKER SIGNED OFF Wednesday on the spending plan that will allow Illinois government to operate fully. He didn’t hesitate. Although the fact that the budget plan approved by the General Assembly was compiled largely by political allies means he didn’t have reason to expect the legislators would slip something in that would embarrass him.

Which led to Illinois being able to have a budget in place when the fiscal year begins.

That shouldn’t be a big deal. It’s what has become sad about Illinois government that it is. We had that two-plus year period during the Rauner years when no budget was in place.

Which caused problems for the ability of state government to operate, and which is largely responsible for the billions of dollars of a backlog that Illinois faces because during the Rauner years, the governor’s office was more concerned with approving measures meant to undermine organized labor – rather than ensuring that government could provide the services that were expected of it.

THERE WAS ONE uncertainty about the budget approval.

For it seems that legal language was inserted into the budget bill that provides for legislators themselves to get pay raises – the first ones they’ve received since back during the Blagojevich era in 2008.

In theory, Pritzker could have used his amendatory veto powers to delete that language – thereby leaving the base of the budget intact while removing the pay hike.

SKILLICORN: More interested in ideology

But Pritzker doesn’t sense the need to mess with the General Assembly – so he’s permitting their pay hike to go into effect.

FOR WHAT IT’S worth, the Legislature pays a base salary of $67,836 per year, and that will increase by $1,600 this year. In short, just under $70,000, which I’m sure some people would argue means they’re grossly underpaid.

But it should be noted the only people who earn that lowly level are the freshmen legislators – and the ones who are so untrusted by leadership that they’re not entrusted to be in positions of authority such as committee chairmanships or ranking minority party members.

So they’re really not underpaid. But it could be argued that, not having had an increase of any sort for 11 years, it was time for the pay scale to be adjusted.

It didn’t stop those in the Republican minority from ranting and raging and DEMANDING that Pritzker use the amendatory veto to delete the pay hikes.

TAKE THE VIEWPOINT of state Rep. Allen Skillicorn, R-East Dundee, who said, “taxes are going up in Illinois to pay for the mismanagement of their money at the state level,” and added, “Legislators do not deserve a pay raise. Giving lawmakers a pay increase is a mistake that the governor can and should correct.”

He was amongst the legislators who either was delusional, or overly politically partisan, enough to say that Pritzker should use the amendatory veto. Even though Pritzker made it clear by Tuesday he fully intended to let the pay raises take effect when he signed off on a $40 billion state budget.

RAUNER: His era seems like centuries ago

With Pritzker saying it was “a highly negotiated budget” with both Democratic and Republican legislative support – implying it would be wrong for him to impose his will on the process.

Not that it should be surprising some people will want to complain. These are political people – after all. Perhaps being a partisan malcontent is just in their very nature. Although my guess is that their real objections is that their “side” didn’t do better back in the 2018 election cycle and their focus is more on 2020 than anything actually happening now.

  -30-

Who benefits from casino locations?

Chicago is finally going to be able to have a casino operating within the city limits, yet that doesn’t mean the politically partisan infighting is anywhere near to being complete.

Where, oh where, in Chicago will this become a reality?

Because Chicago is a big city. Now we get to fight about just where it ought to be located.

JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY is prepared to make an argument about how their neighborhood is the choice location that ought to provide Chicago with the potential economic benefits that a casino can create.

Of course, those arguments are going to be countered with quarrels about how putting a casino in somebody else’s neighborhood is a sure-fire way to ensure that a casino would fail to produce any benefits.

After all, nobody wants to go there!

We’re going to be hearing a lot of these arguments in coming months. Because while people will talk about city-wide benefits from gambling and a casino, they’re going to want to have the perks coming from their own neighborhood. Chicagoans aren’t really united enough to work together for our collective betterment.

WE’D JUST AS soon see each other get screwed over, if it means we can be the ones who come out on top.

That’s why I wonder if the debate over locating a casino will be as long and drawn-out as the fight has been over whether to let Chicago have a casino at all.

There are those who always argued the whole point of casinos was to provide economic benefits to isolated communities that can’t attract any other kind of economic development projects.

They’re the ones who took their opposition to a Chicago casino all the way down to last week’s Legislative vote that permitted the city to have gambling somewhere within their limits.

IT’S INTERESTING TO see Gov. J.B. Pritzker argue against putting a casino anywhere near downtown or the McCormick Place convention center. He said this week he wants a Chicago casino put out in one of the isolated neighborhoods that otherwise wouldn’t have any kind of attraction to draw people within their boundaries.

In short, he’s following the line of logic that Illinois originally had back when it placed casinos in places like East St. Louis or Metropolis.

Although there are other people who think that placing a casino downtown or near the convention centers is the way to ensure that large numbers of Chicago tourists have easy access to the place. Why place a casino at an isolated location where it would be difficult for anybody except for those who already live nearby to attend?

It’s the argument I’ve heard about developing a casino at a South Side location, particularly if we’re talking about the far Southeast Side 10^th Ward.

WHO’D MAKE THE trip to the East Side neighborhood if they weren’t already there. Although there are others who argue that the neighborhood’s proximity to the Illinois-Indiana border and the casinos that have cropped up in Hammond, East Chicago and Gary, Ind., would mean we’d be able to steal away business from Indiana.

In short, get people to quit venturing across the state line when they feel the urge to gamble. Stay in Illinois, and keep your losses here.

Of course, consider that other casinos would be permitted in the nearby south suburbs, Waukegan, Rockford, Danville and Williamson County in Southern Illinois. We’re bound to wind up putting casinos just about everywhere – making it all to easy for people to blow their money on games of chance.

Which could result in the notion of true economic development coming about from drawing real businesses to one’s community – instead of a chance at a job parking cars at the casino or keeping the casino’s buffet well-stocked. Because those are the kind of jobs most likely to be made available from a casino construction somewhere.

  -30-

EXTRA: Burke ‘not guilty,’ or so he pleads; Lightfoot still wants him out!

Long-time Alderman Edward M. Burke entered his legal plea in court on Tuesday, saying he was “not guilty” of any of the criminal charges for which federal prosecutors are now trying to have him put away for up to some 20 years in prison.

BURKE: Claims innocence

For the record, Burke is charged with racketeering, conspiracy to commit extortion, two counts each of attempted extortion and federal program bribery and eight counts of use of interstate commerce to facilitate unlawful activity.

NOT THAT SUCH a plea was unanticipated. The shock would have come about if Burke were willing to actually admit to doing anything illegal. His defense is likely to be that the strongarm tactics he uses is merely the way Chicago government operates.

Which could be why Mayor Lori Lightfoot is so eager to keep ranting that Burke ought to resign his post in the City Council – the one that he won so easily back in February even though he had Latino activists trying desperately to dump him from office.

Lightfoot followed up Burke’s plea at the Dirksen Federal Building with her own statement saying the alderman must go NOW!!!, even though he’s under no legal obligation to do so. It’s federal prosecutors who must prove their case in court before Burke can be removed from office.

Which wouldn’t bother me so much, except that it’s the third time Lightfoot has called for Burke’s resignation in the less-than-a-week it has been since Burke’s criminal indictment became publicly known.

FOR SOMEONE WHO is herself a former federal prosecutor, she has to know her pleas for resignation are meaningless. Is she really that much of a broken record?

I can’t help but think that every time from here on in that she opens her mouth on this issue, she merely builds up Burke’s reinforcement to want to fight this charge in court.

LIGHTFOOT: Keeping up rhetoric of resignation

And also bolsters the Burke backers who probably don’t have any serious objection to what he is alleged to have done. Yes, those people do exist!

Ed Burke’s fate will be decided in due time, most likely in the next couple of years – it takes time to work one’s way through the judicial process. And if Burke is destined for a dismal fate, there’s no need to rush it just to appease the ego of Chicago’s newest politico.

  -30-

Will electorate trust Lori Lightfoot to fill city school board vacancies?

I’ve never been amongst those people who think we ought to be putting it up to the Chicago electorate to decide every few years who should be serving on the board of education for the Chicago Public Schools.

del VALLE: New school board president

Yet there are those who have argued incessantly that giving the mayor the authority to make such appointments is far too much power and influence to be entrusting to one individual.

SO I’M GOING to be curious to see what kind of reaction arises to the fact that newly-elected Mayor Lori Lightfoot has gone ahead and made appointments to the school board.

Seven, to be exact, including the pick of one-time city Clerk and state Senator Miguel del Valle to serve as the new school board president.

Who, as somebody who once tried himself running for mayor against Richard M. Daley, has a political reputation of someone who wasn’t exactly a part of the old boys network and was interested in bringing about change.

Which would sort of put him in line with the image the Lightfoot is trying to create for her own term as mayor. Although Lightfoot herself was opposed to the bill that would have created an elected school board for Chicago (just like all the suburbs have), because she thought the bill’s mechanism was too convoluted.

BUT ARE THE people who view Lightfoot as being all about change and shaking everything up going to accept a school board that they didn’t personally pick?

It could be the big issue. Although I don’t have much of a qualm about accepting it – largely because I think it’s absurd to go about expecting voters (many of whom think there already are too many obscure political posts to have to pick people for) to make qualified choices.

I could easily envision an elected school board becoming a lot like all those judicial posts people are asked to make picks for. Many would wind up skipping over the ballot spots, while others would randomly pick people without much of a clue as to who they’re voting for.

LIGHTFOOT: Picks former mayoral challenger

And yes, I’d put into that category the kind of people who say only semi-jokingly that they look for good Irish-sounding names on the ballot; figuring that’s a sound of respectability and experience.

PERSONALLY, I THINK it is nonsense, and there have been times I’ve been spiteful enough to deliberately vote against an Irish-sounding name – just because I figure that candidate will get too many votes from other people.

I did find it interesting that Lightfoot, amongst her school board picks, were people with education backgrounds – instead of what often becomes of school boards. They get filled with people who have electoral ambitions who, for whatever reason, wind up being unable to find any other office for which to run.

And the idea of del Valle in the top post is also intriguing – and not just because I personally have an interest in seeing increased political empowerment of officials with Latino ethnic backgrounds.

I’ll admit that any Spanish-sounding name on a ballot usually gets a second-glance and extra bit of consideration. So the idea of del Valle – once the first head of a Latino caucus in the General Assembly – isn’t exactly the most outrageous pick that a mayor could make to be in charge of the school board.

WOULD HE HAVE had a chance of getting the post if it had been up to voters making picks on the ballot?

EMANUEL: Would he have ever appointed del Valle?

I don’t know. I suppose he might have, IF the political bosses who put together candidate slates would have seen a benefit to themselves to having del Valle be in the running for the post.

But this may have been an example of how we’re better off with the school board members being political appointees. After all, we always can hold the mayor accountable for her picks if they turn out to be poor ones.

Besides, I suspect the desire of many people to have an elected school board will wither away, now that we have a mayor, such as Rahm Emanuel, whom many of them found so objectionable and whom they were eager to diminish in authority to whatever degree was possible.

  -30-

Lashing out against tweets from twit

It’s almost become the news judgment equivalent of “dog bites man,” President Donald Trump uses his Twitter account to post yet another rant that somehow singles out Mexico for everything The Donald wants to believe is wrong.

The latest anti-Trump retaliatory rant … 

Although there’s something many of the ideologues who chant and cheer every time Trump spews more rhetorical trash ought to keep in mind – the level of contempt is returned.

AND IN THE end, the amount of contempt people wind up feeling toward the United States is escalated – because many figure we were either stupid enough to vote for the buffoon OR were to weak to prevent a man who couldn’t get a majority of the vote from rising to the presidency.

Seriously, people ought to see and/or hear the trash talk that comes from Mexican-Americans whenever the topic of Trump comes up.

Much has been written and spoken of the number of piñatas made in the image of Donald John Trump. Since the ultimate purpose of a piñata is to be smashed by partygoers, it gives people the chance to vent their contempt by taking a two-by-four upside the paper-mache skull of the presidential image.

There also are many t-shirts printed up that take the image of Trump in vain.

… based off the hot-sauce logo

I COULDN’T HELP but notice one shirt I encountered just this weekend when I ventured into the Taste of Mexico festival – held in various cities across our nation. I spent a little bit of time Saturday at the one in Chicago’s Little Village neighborhood.

The shirt was a mock-up of the Tapatio hot sauce logo – only turning the product brand name into a Spanish obscenity, and proclaiming that Trump was all about “hate sauce.”

That, and it reinforced my long-held suspicion that the way to make anyone look ridiculous is to portray them in a sombrero – as this t-shirt did to our sorry excuse of a national leader.

All provoked because Trump himself has a desperate need for someone to bash about, and feels Mexico is an easy target, Largely because it’s right next door. He picks on the one within easy sight. Resulting in the return fire.

Bashing Trump -- literally!

TRUMP’S LATEST TWEETS made Sunday morning were an extension of his threats to impose tariffs that would escalate steadily against Mexican-made goods being brought into this country.

He says he’s more than willing to punish U.S. companies that have transferred operations to Mexico to take advantage of lower labor costs. As Trump put it in his less-than-articulate manner, companies will be, “brought back into the United States through taxation (tariffs). America has had enough!”

While also referring to Mexico as “an abuser” that is “invading” our society.

Actually, what we, the majority of our society, has had enough of is the notion of Donald Trump as president. It’s the reason a growing number of people – including two members of Chicago’s congressional delegation, Jesus Garcia and Danny Davis – are calling for impeachment proceedings.

Garcia and Davis (below) have joined … 

NOT THAT I think such a tactic would work – because I have no doubt that the ideologue nincompoops who run the U.S. Senate and would preside over any impeachment trial would wind up undermining any effort to remove Trump from office – then try to claim it as “God’s will” that Trump remain in office!

The fact is that we’re stuck with him through the end of next year, and will have to hope the political opposition can put together a credible enough campaign on behalf of a candidate who can defeat Trump at the polling place.

… the impeachment parade

Perhaps then, we’ll be able to look back on all the anti-Mexico rhetoric and find some of it amusing – such as the portrayal of Trump in the Tapatio hot sauce sombrero. Or find it as historically telling as we now view much of the anti-Japanese propaganda of the World War II era.

Or perhaps we’ll regard Trump someday similar to how late night television host David Letterman once put it to right-wing radio host (and Trump proponent) Rush Limbaugh, when he asked him on live television, “Do you ever wake up in the middle of the night and think to yourself, ‘I am just full of hot gas’?”

  -30-

Last man standing? It’s Mr. Speaker!

The Illinois General Assembly completed its business for the 2019 spring session this weekend – one day after they were scheduled to do so on Friday. History will record that they managed to get a lot of things done – including some measures (a casino within Chicago) that in the past seemed next to impossible.

 

MADIGAN: Illinois making recovery?

So perhaps it shouldn’t be surprising that Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, felt the need to issue a congratulatory (of sorts) statement.

BUT READING THROUGH it, I couldn’t help but sense the real purpose was to remind people that Bruce Rauner is political history, while he remains in office. Rauner being the guy who spent four years in office perpetually blaming Madigan for Illinois’ inability to get anything done.

And even implying, at times, that Madigan ought to be the Chicago politico facing criminal indictment – rather than Edward M. Burke!

For as Madigan put it, 2019 will go down as the year of a balanced budget that boosts education funding, helps senior citizens and women and helps pay off $1 billion in old bills.

“While there remains more work to be done to put Illinois fully back on track, in these steps we see what Illinois can be when our leaders stand up for our middle-class families while still seeking common ground,” Madigan said. “When we use our time to build compromises, when we have a governor who encourages Illinois to think big again and when we all commit ourselves to working together to build a stronger Illinois.”

I’M SURE THE ideologues of the rural portions of Illinois will have their own retaliatory rants. But the sense is that we are better off for not having a government that was so anxious to play political games with organized labor that it was willing to disrupt its daily operations.

 

RAUNER: He gone!

Heck, even Illinois House Republican Leader Jim Durkin of suburban Westchester called the budget deal “bipartisan” and praised the fact it did not include tax increases.

Which makes the Madigan proclamation of the session’s end seem all the more the equivalent of a political raspberry – aimed in the direction of Gov. Bruce himself.

  -30-

Presumption of innocence, unless it gets in the way of partisan politics

It is one of the pillars upon which our society´s criminal justice system is based – one is presumed innocent of any criminal charges they may face, until the moment they are found “guilty” by a jury of their peers.

BURKE: Not guilty until proven otherwise

That includes Alderman Edward M. Burke, who earlier this year was named in a criminal complaint alleging some improper activity (trying to shake down the operators of a Burger King franchise in his home neighborhood) – but who learned this week the charges against him are now upgraded to include a whole slew of criminal acts.

IT WOULD SEEM that the U.S. Attorney’s office for Northern Illinois (ie., Chicago proper) is planning on making a priority this year (and probably next) out of going after the man who has managed to survive a half-century in the City Council.

But instead of celebrating the 50-year mark with a gift of gold, there are those who want the color orange to eventually predominate (as in an orange jumpsuit like those worn by prison inmates).

Now I’m not trying to defend the conduct of Burke. I’ll be as interested as anyone else in seeing what kinds of details come out of any criminal proceedings that put Burke on trial before a jury of his peers – who will mostly be people who don’t have the clout to get out of jury duty.

It will be intriguing to see if federal prosecutors actually manage to prove their case against Burke to a degree they can get a criminal conviction against the already 75-year-old alderman who probably thought he’d finish up his time as a political elder statesman.

LIGHTFOOT: She wants Burke out NOW!!!

NOT AS A potential federal inmate colleague of the oft-despised former Illinois governor, Rod Blagojevich.

I don’t doubt, however, that some people aren’t willing to wait out the process – the enforcement of which is what gives our society the moral high ground and keeps our courts from being amongst the more tyrannical systems of the world.

Which is why I’m bothered by just how swiftly Mayor Lori Lightfoot jumped all over the Burke name this week in trying to demand his immediate resignation.

It would seem the one-time federal prosecutor is counting on her one-time legal colleagues at the Dirksen Federal Building to knock off the man who’s made it clear he doesn’t view her mayoral election as being some sort of great moment in Chicago history.

FRIAS: The lone acquitted alderman

WHICH ACTUALLY WAS the area in which Burke liked to think of himself as a master. He was the alderman who used to like to end City Council debates on issues with long, drawn-out statements that were loaded with historical trivia and political factoids that supposedly put every issue into context.

But which all too often made Burke seem like an overbloated ego with too strong a sense of his own self-importance.

Perhaps that’s the reason Lightfoot is eager to see Burke (who managed to win re-election earlier this year with ease) out immediately, and doesn’t feel like waiting for the courts to do their business and reach a “guilty” verdict that would force his immediate resignation.

Will it be the 'feds' challenging … 

It would be a lot fewer headaches for Lightfoot – even though someone of her legal background knows full well she doesn’t have the authority to force him to quit now. If anything, his continued presence at City Hall is more about political spite.

NOW IT’S VERY likely that a “guilty” verdict eventually will be reached. The process really is rigged against anyone whom prosecutors decide to go after.

Much is often made of the 30-plus aldermen who, since 1973, were found “guilty” of some sort of criminal act. Much less mentioned is the name “Ray Frias,” who is memorable because he’s the lone alderman indicted who ultimately managed to get a “not guilty” verdict.

So it may well be that Burke’s place in Chicago political history will be the most prominent alderman to wind up “doing time” for actions prosecutors deem criminal, but which some will try defending as, “the way Chicago politics works.”

… City Hall business-as-usual in Burke trial? Photos by Gregory Tejeda

Lightfoot may get her desire for a Burke-less City Council, but she’d better be wary of her own behavior. Because there’s also no doubt some might try to twist her own actions into criminal behavior – perhaps out of a desire they could add a mayoral name to the dozens of aldermen, Illinois governors and Congressmen, who have wound up doing time.

 -30-