Illinois Republican Project

Foie Gras Idiocy

2006-08-23T10:42:00.000-05:00

The Chicago City Council continues to vie for the title of "San Francisco east of the Mississippi." Poor Mayor Daley. He's kind of a meat and potatoes kind of guy but has to put up with a city council eager to make their little social statements. He's got to be thinking "These guys are a bunch of little (insert your noun of choice here)."

Kudos To Mayor Daley

2006-08-18T10:37:00.000-05:00

There is a lot to like about Chicago Mayor Richard Daley when compared to other leading Democrats in Illinois. Sure, I take some umbridge to his ceaseless efforts to promote gun-control and his seemingly zany past support for reparations to the descendents of slaves -- which I still insist was probably just a harmless verbal bone to throw to win some black support without actually doing anything. Every once in awhile though, the Mayor shows that he is at heart a pragmatist with an understanding of how the world really works.

The latest example is his apparently strident opposition to the "big box" wage ordinance passed by the city council. Da Mayor got his hackles up over the comments made by officials from other cities regarding their support for the efficacy of wage and benefit regulations for retailers.

Mayor Richard Daley, who has given strong indications that he will veto the ordinance, scoffed at any comparison between Chicago and the much smaller and more affluent western cities. "They should get back and help their own cities," Daley said of the out-of-town visitors. "I will compare my record to Santa Fe anytime, and San Francisco. You manage your city. We manage here."

The Mayor then demonstrated that he has a basic grasp of the real fundamental issue:

"Why should we raise the wage of some people but not others and make it depend on the size of the stores in which they work?" he said.

Well said, Mayor Daley. It's good to know that there are still a few adults left in the Illinois Democratic Party.

More "Big Box" Nonsense

2006-08-16T14:38:00.000-05:00

Lieutenant Governor Pat Quinn is trying to solidify his membership in the exclusive Moochers Club.

In a move reminiscent of something that would be pursued by the antagonists in Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged, Quinn wants the State of Illinois to compel "big box retailers" to pay their workers an amount in excess of the recently increased minimum wage in Illinois. An ordinance to this effect has already been passed by the Chicago City Council. It is almost assured that any law purposing to require one retailer to pay a higher wage than another retailer will bring about a challenge under the "equal protection" clause of the Constitution.

I'll tell you what Mr. Quinn, why don't you go out and invest your money to create a business that either produces a product or offers a service to consumers. Once you've created something of value, then you can take it upon yourself to pay your employees whatever wage you think is fair and offer them whatever benefits you think are just.

Wal-Mart and other "big box" retailers are producers in society. These stores provide jobs, wealth and affordable products for hundreds of thousands of people worldwide. I'll never understand how someone who hasn't produced anything approaching the value of what a company like Wal-Mart has produced can think that they have a platform to dictate how Wal-Mart should compensate employees. Companies like Wal-Mart are far more indispensable and productive then these moralists will ever be.

Edit: Apparently this is part-and-parcel of a wider political gambit by Democrats.

Obama Speaks Out Against Iraq War

2006-08-16T10:26:00.000-05:00

Democratic hero Barak Obama held a townhall-style meeting where he was critical of the Iraq War. His remarks included the following sentiment:

Enemies in Iran and North Korea, along with terrorist groups bent on doing the United States harm, are getting stronger while the U.S. is bogged down in Iraq, he said.

Why is it so hard to get through to progressive liberals like Obama that the very reason we went into Iraq was to prevent the rogue nation from getting stronger? If Hussein had achieved his nuclear ambitions it would have been too late for preventive action and the United States would have to deal with the possibility of both a nuclear Iraq and North Korea. The evil triumvirate of Iraq, Iran and North Korea could not be dealt with in the same manner simultaneously but we had to start with one of them. It might help our cause if the international community would take these emerging threats seriously instead of dithering with endless debates and meaningless resolutions that always seem to be written with the intent of providing the malcontent regimes with one more chance. This is what it now means to "give diplomacy a chance."

The Bush Administration is the only administration in recent history that has recognized the need to "preempt" the destructive ambitions of rogue regimes before they develop a full compliment of WMD. Meanwhile the left screams and howls at the entire notion of preemptive war. I guarantee that if President Bush had not invaded Iraq and Hussein had developed nuclear capability the Left would excoriate Bush for allowing it to happen.

Obama also used his speech to complain about the use of private contractors in Iraq while making sure to throw the left-wing nutters a bone by including a reference to Halliburton.

He then proceeded to try and draw a distinction between himself and the hard-left base of the Democratic Party by arguing that sometimes war is necessary.

Obama also criticized Democrats who are always opposed to war, even when force is necessary. In cases like World War II and, more recently, removing the Taliban government of Afghanistan, war can be the only option.

All this demonstrates is that progressive liberals can tolerate wars after the fact, especially those wars that are either vindicated by the history books (WWII) or were widely popular at the time (Afghanistan) and were seen as resulting in a quick victory. They unfortunately cannot be counted on to see a war through when times get tough. You can bet that the Democratic legislators who voted for the Iraq War and are now trying to distance themselves from their vote would do a sudden about-face if they believed the outcome in Iraq had taken a dramatic turn for the better.

When it comes to national security, Republicans act while Democrats sift through polling data and react.

Now We're Supposed To Trust Rod?

2006-08-10T23:25:00.000-05:00

The Office of Governor Rod Blagojevich is trying to make the case that it had nothing to do with preferential hiring practices for the well-connected. Representatives of the Governor are trying to convince the state Civil Service Commission that two since-fired employees were responsible for the improprieties and were acting alone, thereby justifying their termination. I tend to believe that the Blagojevich people are just trying to throw these former employees under the bus. That has been, after all, the administration's modus operandi in so many things. This Governor is always in search of a scapegoat to demonize.

Oink If You Love Illinois!

2006-08-08T14:31:00.000-05:00

Sorry I haven't posted in awhile. I'll try and do a better job of staying current, particularly as the gubernatorial race draws near.

In any event, I stumbled across a new blog and the title of the post caught my attention. The bottom line is that the Virginia Institute for Public Policy produces a study on state spending modeled after the federal Grace Commission report of 1980's fame intended to issue recommendations as to where government can be made more cost-efficient for taxpayers.

As far as I know, Illinois doesn't have an institution that publishes a similar report. If I find that such a report exists, I'll certainly post a link to the report on this blog. Heaven knows we have plenty of "piglets" holding office in Illinois. Placating some of them is one of the reasons we just had an overtime legislative session! One might even say that wandering through the halls of the state capitol is not all that different then trapsing through the agricultural section of the state fair. Either way you might just get splattered with mud and filth by the resident mammals.

Ugly Cook County Racial Politics

2006-07-06T09:25:00.000-05:00

John Kass has an interesting take on race and Cook County Board politics. John Daley, brother of Mayor Richard Daley, appears to be retreating from his bid to become interim Board president because of racial intimidation. Todd Stroger, son of incapacitated Board President John Stroger, apparently hasn't given up his desire to succeed his father.

It's a shame that Chicago/Cook County politics has descended into this morass. The recourse to racial politics simply means that a candidate, campaign or political movement has no legitimiate reason to be entrusted with governance. In fact, such race-baiters should be run out of town on rails.

The Governor's Inspector General Weighs In...

2006-07-02T10:51:00.000-05:00

...and it's not looking very good for the Blagojevich Administration. The Tribune carries the piece here. The choice excerpts are as follows:

"This effort reflects not merely an ignorance of the law, but complete and utter contempt for the law," wrote Zaldwaynaka "Z." Scott, who served as Blagojevich's first executive inspector general under an ethics law he signed. Scott, who left the post to join a private law firm last year, said she could not comment on her report.

But the inspector general's report contended the governor's patronage office, whose head, Joe Cini, is under federal scrutiny, worked with Department of Employment Security personnel officials to manipulate job titles, candidate credentials and job descriptions to place applicants sponsored by the governor's office "without following state law or normal state hiring protocol."

"Evidence shows non-compliance with state hiring laws," the inspector general wrote. "In fact, it reveals a concerted effort to subvert the laws including veterans' preference and the hiring process" for jobs protected under a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court ruling known as the Rutan decision.

Keep in mind that the Inspector General is the Administration's official watchdog on the issue of clean government.

Blagojevich Hiring Scandal Deepens

2006-07-01T10:49:00.000-05:00

The administration of Democratic Governor Rod Blagojevich could be in big trouble. The Chicago Tribune reports that Illinois-based U.S Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald -- of Valerie Plame fame -- is seeking to expand the probe into allegations of improper hiring practices in state government. The article contains the following quote from a letter written by Fitzgerald to Madigan regarding the probe:

"Those investigations have now been merged and involve the alleged rigging of state employment practices to enable political hiring in violation of Rutan and include, among other things, the preparation of fraudulent hiring documentation," Fitzgerald wrote. "Our investigation has now implicated multiple state agencies and departments and we have developed a number of credible witnesses."

The decision by Democratic Attorney General Lisa Madigan to turn the investigaton over to the feds is a clear sign of restlessness within a party concerned about the potential political fallout from the investigation. If the Governor goes down, the Illinois Democratic Party will need to expend every effort to limit the damage. Never one to seek out allies when such allies could instead be used as useful political foils, Governor Blagojevich could find himself increasingly isolated and thrown under the bus by his own party.

What is so significant is not just that the Attorney General is handing off the investigation to the feds, but that the Attorney General's father is the chair of the Illinois Democratic Party and a co-chair of the Governor's re-election campaign. If true, the hiring scandal has placed some very powerful people in a very awkward situation to say the least. If the investigation continues to pick up steam, look for key people to begin bailing on the Governor.

The prospect for a GOP pick-up of the Illinois Governor's office just increased substantially.

More:
Chicago Sun-Times
Daily Southtown
Daily Herald

Not So Fast, Son

2006-06-30T22:36:00.000-05:00

Apparently I wasn't alone in having concerns about the reported behind-the-scenes machinations to set Chicago Alderman Todd Stroger up to replace his father as Cook County Board Chairman. It looks like some of the powers-that-be within the Cook County Democratic Party didn't embrace the idea either. From the Tribune piece:

The decision to step down as president is a reversal from earlier in the week when Todd Stroger said his father would serve the remaining five months of his term. The change was widely seen as an attempt to bolster Todd Stroger's bid to replace his father.

Some Democratic leaders and county commissioners balked at the idea that John Stroger would try to retain power while calling on Cook County Democratic committeemen to pick his 43-year-old son to replace him on the Nov. 7 election ballot. They warned of a potential voter backlash that could help the Republican candidate for president, County Commissioner Tony Peraica (R-Riverside).

It's good to see some politicians step forward and say enough is enough -- despite that opposition to the little scheme may have emerged for more cynical electoral reasons rather than any deep principles. For now, it looks like the younger Stroger will have to earn the privilege of serving the people as County Board Chairman.

I see that Backyard Conservative seems to share my take on this little episode. Smart lady, that Backyard Conservative.

More Nepotism In Illinois Politics?

2006-06-27T22:00:00.000-05:00

I saw this one coming a mile away:

Stroger, who suffered a serious stroke in March, intends to serve out his current term as county board president and will push for the party to nominate his son, Ald. Todd Stroger (8th), to replace him on the ballot for president, according to two Democratic committeemen who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

I don't know how Illinois compares to other states, but I've never been comfortable with the in-your-face nepotism that is accepted as part of our political culture. By nepotism, I am referring principally to familial appointments to political office and not so much to family members placing themselves on the ballot and running in a competitive primary election. In recent years, the wives of deceased Senator Vince Demuzio and Representative Tim Osmond have been appointed, as have the sons of deceased Represenative Roger McAuliffe and retired Senator Denny Jacobs. I don't mean to suggest that there is anything wrong with these folks -- they may be fine individuals by any standard. It's nothing personal, just the "principle" of the thing.

I realize that the apparent plan suggested by the article is for John Stroger, not Todd, to continue to hold the county board presidency while Todd is nominated as the general election candidate. This hardly absolves the situation in my mind because the elder Stroger, having already won the primary, would simply be keeping the seat warm for his son. Anyone who understands Chicago politics knows that the real competition for political office is during the Democratic primary. If Stroger the Younger is appointed he will most assuredly coast to victory.

I suppose it bothers me because, as Americans, we live and breath within a society that embraces the merit system and eschews any vestige of a more old-world European familial-based aristrocracy. There seems to be no real reason why a family member should be considered to be "entitled" to an elected office. Sometimes it's done for sentimental reasons. But are we to expect that, when a private sector job opens because of death or retirement, a family member should be offered the job out of "sentimentality?" I suppose it's just another example of how the culture of government can be somewhat of a fantasy land.

I'm well aware of nepotism in the private sector, but helping a family member get a private sector job is not really comparable to appointing a family member to an important elective office where normal competition for the job typically entails public consideration.

I can understand a diversity of opinions on this subject, but the absolute naked nepotism will never quite sit well with me. If a sitting Governor retired while in office and somehow engineered for a family member to succeed him through appointment, people would likely find it either distasteful or outrageous. I don't get the sense that the same sentiment exists when familial appointments occur within lower offices.

Urban Economic Madness

2006-06-21T15:22:00.000-05:00

A new poll commissioned by a local community group in Chicago is being touted to show support for a proposed ordinance mandating that any proposed big box retailer (Walmart, Target, Shopko, etc) must adopt certain wage and benefit thresholds in exchange for being admitted to do business within the City.

Of the 500 registered voters surveyed last week, 84 percent want aldermen to require newly built and existing stores with at least 75,000 square feet of space owned by companies with $1 billion in annual gross revenues to pay employees who work more than five hours a week at least $10 an hour in wages and $3 an hour in benefits.

Keep in mind that the minimum wage in Illinois -- increased as recently as 2005 -- is set at $6.50 per hour. Assuming the accuracy of the poll, we have a perceived sentiment that somehow a store like Walmart should be obligated to compensate employees with at least $13 per hour in wage and benefits despite the fact that an employee working at a smaller retailer down the street is only entitled to $6.50 per hour with no benefits. Unbelievable!

Then there's this statement from the Sun-Times article:

Chicagoans overwhelmingly favor wage and benefit standards for Wal-Mart and other "big-box" retailers, even if it places jobs at risk....

Huh? So, just to get this straight, Chicagoans would rather hold some stores to a higher wage and benefit standard than others, even though such a policy would most certainly cost the city jobs? Alright, that's just crazy talk and, not to mention, patently unfair.

The real story here is that large urban areas have become magnates for anti-capitalist nutters who embrace the tenents of statist socialism that only result in the further impoverishment of those whom these "progressives" think they are actually helping. Rather than allowing Walmart to provide jobs and low-cost food and products to those toward the bottom of the economic ladder, these patently self-righteous leftists would rather have fewer jobs and more expensive products.

Perhaps the real issue is that the employees of these big box retailers refuse to be coerced into unionizing, thereby denying the denizens of the big labor racket the pleasure of shaking down the companies to increase the financial well-being and political power of the fat and happy union bosses -- largely at the expense of the people they purport to represent.

This was surely the impetus behind legislation introduced by Chicago Democrat and Illinois Senate Labor Committee Chair Carol Ronen in 2003 that would have prohibited local governments from allowing big box retailers into their communities. Imagine the audacity behind such legislation -- which would have empowered the State of Illinois to order local communities to keep Walmart out even if local voters wanted the store in their community. So much for local control. What such a bill reveals, however, is the willingness of the radical left to throw local voters under the bus if it means favor can be curried with the union bosses who fund their political campaigns.

The message of the labor unions has become nothing more than, "Hey, don't let the big, evil corporations exploit you and keep you in a state of perpetual servitude when we are more than happy to do it ourselves!"

Da Boss, Part Deux

2006-06-21T14:33:00.000-05:00

The apple may not fall far from the tree, but it certainly can learn a few new tricks.

The Chicago Tribune has an interesting piece about how Mayor Daley structured his political organization. The story is the latest installment in the ongoing coverage of the federal patronage trial that has enveloped the Daley Administration.

Daley has echewed the more traditional practice of utilizing existing ward-based political organizations -- a strategy embraced by his father -- in favor of tapping city workers who in turn recruit and organize in each ward. From the article:

Even as aldermen and committeemen remain the public faces of political power in Chicago, the true clout belonged to obscure city officials who could marshal their workers to campaign for Daley, judging by a hiring list allegedly kept in the mayor's office.

This manner of organization obviously maximizes the Mayor's power by allowing him to bypass -- and therefore avoid genuflecting to -- existing political interests that may conflict with his own agenda. The dispensing of city jobs and promotions -- traditionally a golden prerogative of alderman and other well-known and high-ranking officials -- instead fell under the aegis of the relatively unknown city employees actively involved in organizing the mayors re-election campaigns.

Blagojevich's Approval/Disapproval Numbers

2006-06-20T10:20:00.000-05:00

Survey USA has an interesting graph illustrating Governor Blagojevich's approval/disapproval ratings over a period of approxmately one year through June 12, 2006. Not very good news for the embattled Governor. According to the poll, rising approval ratings and falling disapproval ratings are more exception than rule.

California Voters Reject Universal Preschool

2006-06-07T10:11:00.000-05:00

California voters had the opportunity to vote "yea" or "nea" on a ballot initiative to create a program of universal preschool. The voters overwhelmingly rejected the initiative by a vote of 61%-39%. Ouch! A $2.4 billion price tag for what would have amounted to increasing preschool attendance by approximately 4% was too much for even liberal California voters. It makes me wonder what would have happened with Governor Blagojevich's universal preschool initiative had the issue gone before the voters instead of the Democrat-controlled state legislature.

The Illinois plan is estimated to cost about $135 million over the first three years, but estimates on future costs were unknown. As with many cost estimates associated with government programs, the expense of providing universal preschool is likely to exceed initial forecasts.

Bacon Anyone?

2006-05-04T11:24:00.000-05:00

I know it's only a drop in the bucket in the context of the overall '07 Budget, but allocating $200,000 to Northeastern Illinois University for a study of the North Atlantic Slave Trade is just dumb. If the state wants to award money for an academic study, how about one that is at the very least intended to address a contemporary problem rather than an historical occurrence that took place over 200 years ago and has already received extensive scholarly attention?

What's next, $150,000 to conduct a study about the psychology behind the Salem Witch Hunt?

And The Budget Madness Continues

2006-05-03T14:46:00.000-05:00

I'm sure if someone scrutinized the $56,000,000,000 state budget closely enough, they would find a line-item for thousands of shovels. After all, the state legislators supporting this exceedingly embarrassing budget will need them to dig further and further down into the hole they are creating. I bet they forgot to budget for the ladders and grappling hooks necessary to pull themselves out. From the Sun-Times:

But Republicans pointed out that the Democrat-drafted budget depends on reducing payments to the state's ailing pension systems. They also said it would leave the state with about $2 billion in unpaid medical bills by the end of the fiscal year.

The train has definitely jumped the track.

Illinois' Economic Unraveling

2006-04-17T11:24:00.000-05:00

This editorial in the Madison-Saint Clair Record makes the case regarding the state's economic woes. Here are the key sections:

You may have missed it in the headlines last week, but independent bond rating agency Fitch announced it was giving three states a "negative" economic outlook or 2006-- Michigan, Louisiana, and Illinois.

Our "massive underfunded pension liability," as Fitch called it, is the largest in the nation and figures to get worse over the next few years. That's because the folks we elected to deal with it seem content to pass the buck, figuring they'll be long gone by the time things really get ugly.

There's no other way to decipher why Blagojevich has called for the state to spend $1 billion more this year than it did last, while Senate President Emil Jones, Jr. (D-Chicago) is angling to give lawmakers a 10% pay raise while borrowing an additional $4.3 billion on top of the $20.3 billion we already owe.

Illinois Democratic leadership is running this state into the ground and have exhibited no shame in doing so. Hey, at least we're being "progressive."

Dysfunctional Illinois Democrats

2006-04-11T16:02:00.000-05:00

It's the return of the gang that couldn't shoot straight.

How is it that the Democrats can control the Governor's mansion and both legislative chambers yet cannot manage a resolution to the state budget by the predetermined deadline? After all, they don't need Republican votes to pass the budget. As a matter of fact, there weren't supposed to be any problems with the budget this year because of the decision made last year to skip the pension payments. Yet, here we are with another extended session while the Democrats argue amongst themselves whether they will spend a little more money than we actually have or a lot more money than we actually have.

State government has been highly dysfunctional ever since the Democrats took control of the executive and legislative branches of government in 2003. Pension payments have been skipped, fees have been raised, debt has grown substantially, legislative sessions have gone into overtime more often than not, Speaker Madigan, Senate President Jones and Governor Blagojevich have repeatedly sniped at one another and a third party gubernatorial candidate may rise from the Democratic ranks pledging to spend even more money than proposed by the current leadership despite the manifest fiscal wreckage.

One of the biggest problems with the Illinois Democratic Party is the very nature of its constituency. Rather than being organized around a few basic principles or ideas, the entire movement is made up of different factions -- each screaming louder than the next for more money. The end result is increasing debt and overtime sessions where the decision is made regarding exactly how much money it will take to at least temporarily satiate the apparently endless hunger pangs of screeching special interests.

There is nothing "progressive" about spending money that one doesn't have. It's reckless and grossly unfair to future generations.

Illinois Senate Republicans Defeat Capital Bond Program And Strike A Blow For Fiscal Sanity

2006-04-07T08:24:00.000-05:00

Democratic charade or not, Illinois Senate Republicans should be congratulated for firmly standing against and defeating two bills that would have thrown the state even further into debt by borrowing 4.3 billion dollars for school and infrastructure spending. Republican candidates can now hit the campaign trail and make the case that they are the party of fiscal discipline in Illinois.

I was also encouraged to read this. It seems that Republican candidates are also actively making the case that the pension systems are in dire straits for lack of appropriate funding -- another issue that gets at the core of the broader fiscal discipline message. The story about the targeted robocalls in Democratic-controlled legislative districts raising the pension funding issue and placing it in the context of the overall state budget is also encouraging. It shows that the Illinois Republican Party intends on being aggressive on the issue.

Illinois Republicans should present voters with a stark choice in the fall. The choice is between candidates supportive of fiscal discipline, or candidates, and in particular Governor Blagojevich, more interested in using hard-earned tax dollars to shamelessly pander and buy-off constituencies while allowing state finances to circle the drain.

The Illinois Republican Party Message

2006-03-30T10:26:00.000-06:00

To win in November, Judy Barr Topinka and her Republican colleagues need to campaign hard on the following four points:

Control the spending
Fix the pensions
Don't raise the taxes
Clean-up the corruption

In particular, Illinois Republicans should make the case to the voters that a failure to control spending or address the looming pension debt will inevitably lead to higher taxes. It's time to derail the gravy train. The continuing coverage of the trial of former Governor George Ryan and recent spate of stories about the fate of former House Republican Chief of Staff Mike Tristano -- and the resultant fallout -- will keep the corruption story in the news, preserving the desire of Illinois citizens to drain the cesspool of Illinois politics.

The Meeks Candidacy

2006-03-29T10:30:00.000-06:00

State Senator James Meeks appears to be predicating his prospective gubernatorial bid on the need for even more state spending. Perhaps he should consider organizing his independent bid under the banner of the Bankruptcy Party.

Meeks will undoubtedly hold some appeal for disaffected Democrats and maybe even some social conservatives and single-issue pro-life voters. While in many ways an admirable leader, Meeks' almost zealous insistence on billions in additional spending given the state's practically empty coffers should serve as a huge red flag to conservatives seriously considering him as a viable candidate. In my mind, the principle issue facing the state at this time is budgetary spending, particularly the impact of looming pension debt on future budgets.

At stake is a key decision about the future of Illinois. Will we continue down the path we are on and become a bastion of "progressiveness" in the Midwest with exorbitant tax rates, powerful public sector labor unions and continually expanding state social and economic entitlements? Or will we reign in the spending, keep taxes low, reduce the size and scope of government and rely on a vibrant private sector economy to realize dynamic economic gains? A vote for Meeks by social conservatives is a vote for the "progressive" vision of economic statism in exchange for a pro-life Governor without any legal authority to bring about an end to abortion. It just doesn't make any sense.

I'm also troubled by the following statement made in the pulpit by Senator Meeks in his capacity as Reverend Meeks:

"If I do run and there are two people in the race who both are not standing for morality, if I don't have every white Christian vote in the State of Illinois, I will stand at the top of the Sears Tower and call every one of y'all racist."

These remarks are highly offensive in that they present a false choice for evangelical voters -- you're either with Senator Meeks or you're a racist. Senator Meeks may be a wonderful spiritual leader, and he certainly has done remarkable things for his church community and neighborhood, but this hint of his willingness to play the race card is purely demagogic and beneath a man of his reputation and renown.

As a social conservative, I appreciate and support many of Senator Meeks' positions on various issues. As a fiscal conservative, I could never support a campaign calling for even more profligate spending knowing what I do about the fiscal status of the State as well as what the "progressive" vision entails. I will be voting for Judy Barr Topinka and the restoration of fiscal sanity. In that a Meeks candidacy will likely bring about a Topinka victory in the fall, I welcome him to the race with open arms.

Tackling The Pension Debt

2006-03-26T19:12:00.000-06:00

Regular readers of this blog are familiar with my oft-repeated contention that something needs to be done, and soon, about the looming pension funding crisis in Illinois. Most of the media attention has heretofore been trained upon the underfunded systems for which the State is responsible for making contributions. These systems include the Teacher's Retirement System, State Employees Retirement System, State University Retirement System, Judges Retirement System and General Assembly Retirement System. Here is a breakdown of these five systems -- available upon request from the Public Pension Division of the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation -- along with each system's unfunded liability:

Teacher's Retirement System $21,989,800,000
State Employees System $8,810,500,000
State Universities Retirement System $6,999,700,000
Judges Retirement System $671,600,000
General Assembly Retirement System $129,600,000
Total Unfunded Liability $38,601,200,000

There is, sadly, much more to the pension funding crisis than just these five systems. There are twelve other public pension systems in Illinois besides the state-funded systems. These other systems are largely funded by local governments, and ultimately, local taxpayers. Much like the state systems, these twelve systems all face staggering unfunded liabilities. Here is a breakdown of each system along with its respective unfunded liability:

Chicago Police $3,101,300,000
Chicago Fire $1,610,900,000
Cook County Employees $2,750,000,000
Chicago Municipal Employees $2,465,400,000
Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund $2,154,200,000
Downstate Police $1,921,800,000
Downstate Fire $1,114,900,000
Metropolitan Water Reclamation District $416,600,000
Cook County Forest Preserve District $158,800,000
Chicago Park District $128,300,000
Chicago Laborers $24,600,000
Chicago Teachers $1,713,500,000
Total Unfunded Liability $17,560,300,000

All of these pension systems together carry -- are you ready -- a cumulative cost of $56,161,500,000 in unfunded liability. In other words, these public pension systems have over 56 billion dollars in obligations for which no money has yet been set aside. To put this into perspective, the Governor's proposed FY 2007 budget calls for 45.4 billion dollars in spending. Even if, theoretically speaking, every dime of this money were allocated toward the unfunded public pension liability in Illinois, there would still be liability left unpaid. The total liability for the state-funded systems comes in under the proposed FY 2007 budget, but by only about 6.8 billion dollars. The bottom line? Unless the State begins to radically reprioritize its approach to budgeting, the question will become when, not if, there will be a massive tax increase on Illinois citizens.

Both the state-funded pension systems and the local government pension systems have something else in common besides unfunded liability. The pension benefit levels of all 17 of these systems are established by the Illinois General Assembly. When it comes to increasing costly benefits in the local government pension systems, the Illinois General Assembly gets to spend money using somebody else's checkbook. Either way, Illinois taxpayers foot the bill in state and local taxes.

The pension indebtedness figures, and the apparent lack of political will to reprioritize spending and usher in real pension reform, bring thoughts of Nero fiddling while Rome burned. Perhaps in our case, Governor Blagojevich singing "hunk a hunk of burnin' love" while the last few pennies are carted out of the state treasury is a more appropriate visualization. The Governor's addiction to finding new ways to spend money, such as his All Kids health insurance program and his most recent proposal to offer taxpayer-funded universal preschool, become all the more inexplicable when viewed in light of the ever-mounting pension debt. The Illinois Democratic Party is spending us into oblivion with seemingly no cares beyond the next election.

Let's hope Judy Barr Topinka and the Illinois Republican Party pound the significance of the pension issue home to the voters during the 2006 campaign. Illinois government is ready for real reform. There may still be enough time left to change course and avoid impact with the iceberg.

It's Topinka

2006-03-22T09:22:00.000-06:00

Illinois Republican voters have given a plurality to State Treasurer Judy Barr Topinka, giving her the right to challenge Governor Rod Blagojevich in the November election.

Although I am more conservative than Topinka, her nomination is probably ideal for Illinois Republicans. She seems to be the Republican candidate best positioned to draw votes out of heavily-populated Cook County, particularly among those Democrats and Independents who supported Blagojevich in 2002 but are now disenchanted and seeking an alternative. Most importantly, she was able to hold off dairy magnate Jim Oberweis, a candidate whose values I share but whose candidacy would have been a train wreck of epic proportions for the Party. Oberweis would have provided far too much fodder for the Governor to use his millions of dollars in campaign funds to turn Oberweis into a caricature of himself. It would have been ugly, and ensured that Blagojevich would, barring indictment, serve a second term.

It will be critical in the coming months to convince backers of Oberweis, and to a lesser extent Brady, to throw their support behind Judy. She may not be their ideal candidate, as she is not mine, but politics needn't be an all or nothing proposition. While Judy may be more liberal on certain social issues, she will likely be a far more palatable option than Governor Blagojevich on issues relating to taxes, fees, spending, labor, pension funding and commerce. My fellow conservatives need to keep in mind that, even if Oberweis or Brady were to become Governor, a General Assembly controlled by Democrats wouldn't be inclined to take up sweeping conservative reforms anyway. We must walk before we can run. All significant levers of government in Illinois are controlled by the Democratic Party. The best option for conservatives to gain some influence in the near-term is to win the Governor's mansion back. We can build from there, but right now we have nothing.

The greatest gift conservatives can give Governor Blagojevich is to stay home on election day to "send a message." Personally, I say we take half a loaf and worry about the rest later.

Let The Voting Complaints Begin

2006-03-21T14:10:00.000-06:00

But I thought that new voting technology was going to solve the problems threatening electoral democracy? Some excerpts from the Tribune article:

I had my own. When I tried to vote in Evanston, the touch screens were down, had been down since 6 a.m. and the election people were having no success getting help. I stopped by a second precinct just to check and found the same problem. "The memory thingie doesn't work," said an election official.

It is a shame that tens of millions have been spent and the technology hasn't delivered on its promises."

Someone there told me he would add my report to similar ones that were being received in some number. When I asked what it would mean to the integrity of the election, to have a number of people unable to vote as they wished, he had no definite answer.

The Sun-Times has an article about the new voting technology. I used the touch-screen technology for the first time when I voted this morning. It gave me no problems and was generally user-friendly, but it occurred to me that the technology will likely intimidate people who aren't used to computers. Basically, if someone can use an ATM machine or is comfortable making a purchase at a store where a stylus is used in tandem with a touch screen, they shouldn't have any problems. With time, more and more people will be exposed to similar technology in their daily lives.

No matter the technology, though, some people will always have problems, real or perceived, with voting. The end result of the supposed voting "debacle" in Florida during the 2000 election is that, millions of dollars later, people now have new voting technology to gripe about. And gripe they will.

Update -- More about the voting problems here.

More Crook County Election Shenanigans

2006-03-19T10:29:00.000-06:00

I'm shocked, shocked to see that election violations are occuring here! Just another day in Cook County. Pehaps it's time for a federal prosecutor to clean out the embarrassing sewer that is Cook County electoral politics. It's certainly a long-time coming.

Terrorists Casing Chicago Or Just Confusion?

2006-03-16T23:10:00.000-06:00

This story is a bit disturbing:

Sears Tower employees Thursday reportedly received bulletins from building management reassuring them that there is no terror threat. But those bulletins failed to explain the incident ABC7 reported, that three suspicious looking men in a rental car pulled up to the building recently, got out and began studying the building. According to law enforcement sources, they took pictures before building security ran them off, but they never got their identification. Those sources tell ABC7 the car was rented to a fake name.

It seems a little odd that the agencies involved -- Chicago police, FBI and building management -- can't seem to agree on what happened. The disagreement doesn't serve to inspire confidence.

Are Chicago Museums Racist?

2006-03-15T14:33:00.000-06:00

I had to shake my head after reading this story about attendance at select Chicago museums. The story appears to have less to do with museums than with race, income and discrimination. A study conducted by the Joyce Foundation and University of Chicago Cultural Policy Center states the following:

The maps raise questions about minority outreach—and whether poor people are being priced out of attendance and ignored by the metropolitan area's largest centers of culture.

Maybe I'm nit-picking, but this is an interesting way to frame the issue. Is the statement implying that the staffs at several of Chicago's major museums, who after all design the marketing campaigns and set ticket prices, are closet racists? Why drag race and income into the matter?

The article goes on to explain that the study found that attendance at "smaller niche cultural institutions reached groups that the major institutions did not...." So it's not that minorities and those with lower incomes aren't interested in or benefiting from "cultural institutions," but that the not-so-wealthy happen to be attending cultural institutions other than the larger, better-known ones. This seems to be a direct contradiction with the opening contention of the article, which proclaims how the study showed that Chicago's cultural institutions are almost wholly destinations for rich white people.

I'd be interested in looking at the actual study and raw results. It doesn't appear, at least based upon the article, that the study actually asked people what motivated them to attend certain cultural institutions and not others. Wouldn't that have been a logical question to ask? Instead we are left to speculate about the "many questions" raised by the study.

I also found the following study finding somewhat interesting:

Higher income and education are the primary factors in driving attendance.

So, is the issue really about museum "outreach" or formal education? Making it about "outreach" suggests that select museums are somehow at least partly culpable for lower attendance by minorities and the poor. It would be interesting to see the results of a study that adjusted for education across race and income. My assumption, of course, is that well-educated minorities do in fact attend the major museums. The key is really education, but that doesn't advance a social agenda quite like "discovering" another forum where "discrimination" exists.

Abuse Of Power By Chicago Democrats

2006-03-11T11:27:00.000-06:00

The Daily Herald reports on a lawsuit filed against the Governor by the Village of Bensenville in retaliation to the signing into law of a bill forcing the Village to restructure its police and fire service. At issue is whether or not the bill was political payback for the Village's opposition to the O'Hare expansion policy sought by Chicago.

Bensenville adopted the policy of cross-training their police officers to also perform duties normally performed by fire fighters. Instead of being considered fire fighters or police officers, the cross-trained employees are referred to as public safety officers. In moving forward with the program, the Village won agreement with local unions for the combined safety department in exchange for awarding a 12 percent pay raise to employees.

The legislation was supposedly pushed because certain lawmakers opposed the concept behind Bensenville's combined public safety department. The bill's sponsors -- Chicago Democrats -- argued that combined departments are unsafe because no amount of cross-training can make a firefighter competent to perform the role of a policeman, and vice versa. The problem, however, is that if these Chicago Democrats thought the program was so unsafe for the public, why ban the program in only one city? At least two other suburban cities, Glencoe and Rosemont, have combined public safety departments. Under the new law, they are permitted to continue operating as combined departments.

This double-standard is the reason why Bensenville believes the law was designed to punish them for their opposition to O'Hare expansion. Being that the sponsors of the bill were Chicago Democrats, Bensenville's allegation is probably well-founded. The outcome of the lawsuit will be interesting, and I will continue to follow this story because it is the classic tale of big, powerful and well-connected political insiders abusing their power to punish those who are smaller and weaker. This situation is reminiscent of the heavy-handedness employed by Chicago when the bulldozers were sent to destroy the Meigs field runway during the dead of night. Interestingly, public safety concerns were also cited as the reason for that little manuever. Apparently when it comes to airports, the city plays for keeps.

Often times these stories have a way of slipping by without receiving much attention, further empowering the abusers to continue to wield their power indiscriminately. I hope the public begins to pay attention to stories like this.

Chicago Immigration March

2006-03-10T21:24:00.000-06:00

Michelle Malkin posts about the massive demonstration held in Chicago today against the illegal immigration bill passed in the United States House of Representatives. The legislation, HR 4437, would make it a criminal offense to come to the United States illegally. The legislation would penalize those who assist illegal immigrants and also calls for a fence along the border.

The House bill is unlikely to become law, as the Senate plans to advance a version of its own. The Senate bill seeks to strike a compromise between those calling for a round-up of illegal aliens and those attempting to win eventual citizenship rights for all illegals.

Something will likely be done to change U.S. immigration policy in the very near future. The reality of politics dictates that the new policy will probably be some kind of compromise involving a guest-worker program that won't be universally embraced. Conservatives supporting HR 4437 will be disappointed that illegals won't be booted out of the country en masse, and liberals will likely protest anything that falls short of open borders and complete amnesty. Corporate America could very well be the most satisfied party because they are likely to retain access to the cheap labor that illegal immigration provides. This won't make the unions very happy, but American private sector unionism is in a precipitous state of decline anyway. Once could argue that years of union demands and subsequent wage and benefit victories are at least partially responsible for business being so eager to employ illegals in the first place.

I'm just resigned to the fact that, for better or worse, a compromise policy will be the likely outcome. Let's just hope the policy ends up being a sensible one allowing the federal government to know who is here, why they are here and, most importantly, if American citizens are safe with them here. Those here illegally after the inception of the policy need to be removed from our communities.

Bad Day For Blagojevich

2006-03-09T08:55:00.000-06:00

It's not turning into a very good day for the Blagojevich Administration on a few fronts.

State Auditor Bill Holland's Office announced that a reorganization of the IDOT traffic safety division, supposedly undertaken to reduce costs, actually increased outlays by $440,000 a year. The agency claims that the reorganization is saving $1.9 million a year. The money may seem like a drop in the bucket in the context of the overall state budget, but is another example of the Blagojevich Administration's propensity to make a claim that just doesn't hold water under independent review.

A top IDOT official -- and close friend of the Governor -- lost his job after a DUI in which his kids were in the car.

The Tribune has published an editorial critical of the Governor for not showing leadership during the debacle involving the Commission on Discrimination and Hate Crimes. So far five Jewish members have chosen to resign from the Commission. The Governor needs to ask appointee Claudette Marie Muhammad to either renounce the anti-Semitic statements of Nation of Islam Leader Louis Farrakhan or leave the Commission. If she won't leave, the Governor needs to bite the bullet and remove her. If the Governor values keeping the black community on his side during the next election over condemning hate, he needs to just dissolve the Commission. Each day he fails to address the controversy only makes the Commission look like a hollow, political farce. To this date, the Commission is only serving to ratchet up tensions between blacks and Jews - certainly not its goal at inception. The Daily Southtown weighs in here. The Lieutenant Governor is breaking with the Governor over his silence on the matter.

The Governor has put himself in one heck of a situation. By claiming he didn't know that Muhammed was a member of the Nation of Islam, he is admitting to personal incompetence at worst, or staff incompetence at best. If the latter, the Governor shares responsibility because the quality of his staff appointments is a direct reflection on him. If he chooses to do nothing, he is all but admitting that fostering tolerance and unity -- presumably the Commission's mandate -- isn't really all that important to him. The Commission then becomes just another prop in the smoke-and-mirrors governing show he is trying to foist on the citizens of Illinois. If he does act, but waits too long, he will look weak and inauthentic. He certainly won't be viewed as a man with the courage of his convictions, but perhaps that time is long passed anyhow.

Once again, it's a bad day for the Governor.

The Governor's Outrageous Bond Proposal

2006-03-07T16:37:00.000-06:00

I can hardly conceive of a more irresponsible policy then for the State to authorize a 3.3 billion dollar bond program for infrastructure spending. Needless to say, the bond program is exactly what Governor Blagojevich is trying to get through the General Assembly.

It was only a few years ago that Governor Ryan, much to the chagrin of Illinois conservatives, won passage for his 12 billion dollar Illinois First bond plan for infrastructure investment. Flash forward about seven years, and we are being told that Illinois is in dire need of another round of infrastructure spending. In reality, the money is being sought to allow the Governor to travel around the State prior to an election and hand out checks at well-publicized press events. Undoubtedly, many individual legislators would like to do the same, increasing the possibility that the fiscal idiocy will continue.

I've harped on it before (and will continue to do so), but we are headed for a fiscal crisis unless State leaders clamp down on spending and address the long-term pension funding crisis. I fear that such a fiscal crisis will serve as the impetus for an income tax increase. Illinois labor unions are already calling for increased taxes to ensure enough money is present for their legislative priorities.

The politics behind the bonding proposal will be a good test of Republican leaders in the General Assembly. Only time will tell if they will go along with the Democrats or draw a proverbial line in the sand and establish their fiscal bonafides. There simply is no compelling reason -- politically or policy-oriented -- for Republicans to support the plan. The bonding would sink the State even deeper into debt and politically benefit the Governor in the short-term. So far, the news seems to be good.

The Illinois Republican Party needs to clearly distinguish itself from the Democrats by offering a compelling vision for the future of Illinois -- particularly one that doesn't result in fiscal crisis and increased taxation. Using opposition to the bond bill to set themselves up as the party of fiscal discipline would be a good start.

Should The Illinois Judiciary Be Elected?

2006-03-06T21:24:00.000-06:00

I've never been fully comfortable with an elected judiciary for reasons like this. I suppose I would at least like the judicial branch to have the appearance of objectivity. Judge Karmeier may very well be the target of an unfair allegation, but this is largely beside the point.

Ideology, to the extent it informs judicial philosophy, will always influence judicial activity. To a certain degree, people understand that judges have differences of opinion with regard to judicial philosophy. Not that people approve of particular judicial philosophies -- just that they remain aware that differences exist.

These differences are best discussed either during a Senate confirmation process or during a judicial election. The problem with judicial elections is the nexus between money, promises and the judicial candidate on the ballot. Americans are rightly cynical about our politicians. We want them to exceed our expectations, but understand that they come under the suasion of money and campaign promises to various interests. I just can't help but think that judges should be removed from direct involvement in the trench warfare aspect of politics -- even if only for appearances sake.

Early Voting Headaches

2006-03-04T11:25:00.000-06:00

Supporters of Cook County Board President candidate Forrest Claypool filed a lawsuit on Friday alleging that the dispersion of early voting sites throughout Chicago and Cook County suburbs was done in a manner to benefit the regular Cook County Democratic Party (a.k.a., the Machine). Both the Tribune and Sun-Times are covering the story.

The campaign of current Board President John Stroger is accusing Claypool of engaging in a last-minute publicity tactic. The Chicago Board of Elections contends that polling locations have been predicated upon geographic considerations, not with an eye toward ensuring that each neighborhood has a site.

Regardless, this story only confirms that liberalizing voting procedures, or even changing voting technology, leads to more opportunities for malfeasance and corruption or increases suspicions of such activity. If a citizen desires to exercise their right to vote, either show up on election day or cast an absentee ballot. It's really not that hard.

Feds Looking At Durbin

2006-02-27T23:27:00.000-06:00

Could Senator Durbin be implicated in the federal investigation into who leaked national security briefings?

Word out of the Defense Intelligence Agency and law enforcement sources has the FBI and the Department of Justice comparing notes and dates on who in the U.S. Senate received national security briefings on both the overseas terrorist prisons and the NSA overseas terrorist monitoring programs, and when those briefings took place.

Focus of the investigation remains on the staffs of two Senators, Sen. Jay Rockefeller and Sen. Dick Durbin, as well as committee staff for the Senate Intelligence Committee and career intelligence staff detailed to U.S. Senate offices and committees.

Hmmmmmmm.

House Of Cards

2006-02-20T15:23:00.000-06:00

During his annual budget address, Governor Blagojevich had the audacity to claim that his policies have improved Illinois' fiscal situation. In particular, the Governor made the bodacious claim that his Administration had "strengthened our pensions over the past three years." Republican lawmakers could simply take it no more, letting the Governor know their displeasure for such a bald-faced untruth by emitting loud jeers. It was truly an uncomfortable moment.

The Governor based his claim partly on the fact that the State has, at least on paper, decreased its unfunded pension liabilities over the short term because of the decision made in 2004 to issue $10 billion in Pension Obligation Bonds (POB). This pension bonding arbitrage scheme was really pursued as a short-term play to come up with the funds necessary to pump into the pension system without having to make any politically difficult choices -- such as reducing pensions for new hires, raising taxes or, better yet, cutting spending. As a result, the borrowing has exposed the State to significant long-term risk because of the back-loaded financing of the bonded indebtedness. Additionally, the State took the $2 billion in profits from the arbitrage and, rather then investing it back into the pension system, allocated it toward budgetary spending. The remaining $7.3 billion went into the pension system, and the State hopes it will become $62.4 billion -- factoring in debt service -- after 30 years, assuming an interest rate of 8.5%. Sounds good, but it could backfire spectacularly if the market doesn't perform up to expectations.

A year after imposing his risky arbitrage scheme, the Governor opted to skip the required pension payments for the FY' 2006 budget altogether. One year later, he is making the unbelievable claim that he has strengthened the State pension systems. The State needs to move away from these dangerous and irresponsible policies and usher in serious pension reforms before it is too late.

Awash In Spending

2006-02-14T08:41:00.000-06:00

The Chicago Tribune has a great article that highlights the propensity of the Blagojevich Administration to spend money the state doesn't have. How about this line from Director of Management and Budget John Filan:

"When you balance budgets, balancing isn't just about arithmetic. Balancing is about lots of priorities in this state," said the governor's budget director, John Filan.

Sounds like a guy who isn't even pretending anymore that sound budgetary policies are being pursued and that, to the contrary, the Governor will continue to spend more money on whatever he darn well pleases. Future governors having to clean-up this mess will be cursing the name of Rod Blagojevich. To be fair, they probably won't have many kind words for George Ryan either.

A Chorus Of Criticism For Blagojevich Preschool Plan

2006-02-13T10:17:00.000-06:00

Hopefully this is the first of many critical articles regarding the Governor's universal preschool proposal. Kudos to the Tribune journalists who pointed out that the proposal faces legal hurdles associated with the Governor's penchant for raiding state funds to pay for his additional spending programs:

The program--a minimum 2 1/2-hour school day--would not be mandatory, and many families would likely stay in private preschools. Blagojevich's plan would cost an extra $135 million in the initial three years, with the price tag in outlying years still uncertain. In addition, the governor wants to finance the plan in part with money from state accounts reserved for special purposes, a practice that has spurred legal challenges.

This segment from an article published in the Arlington Heights Daily Herald sheds some additional light on the motivations behind the Governor's universal preschool proposal:

The proposal is the result of two years of work by the Early Learning Council, an unpaid state panel of experts formed to look at early childhood learning. The founder of the Ounce of Prevention Fund, one of the groups pushing universal preschool, also is one of Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s top campaign donors. Irving Harris has given $100,000 to Friends of Blagojevich: $50,000 in May 2002 and another $50,000 on Christmas Eve 2004.

The Governor's Republican opponents also appear to be forming a unified opposition to the proposed program.

“It’s a $135 million TV commercial at taxpayers’ expense,” said Treasurer Judy Baar Topinka, referring to the program’s estimated cost the first three years.

“It’s akin to using a loophole closing for a noose,” said Gidwitz, who last week proposed a $25 million program to get the remaining 6 percent of 5- and 6-year-olds into kindergarten. “He’s been strangling Illinois businesses since his first day on the job and it’s got to stop.”

State Sen. Bill Brady of Bloomington suggested Blagojevich “must sit around dreaming up programs for his national ambition.”

Sugar Grove businessman Jim Oberweis questioned whether the science behind Blagojevich’s proposal is solid, claiming it’s based on one 30-year study that had flaws. Even if it were solid, Oberweis said a more efficient approach is to provide a tax credit to allow child care businesses and faith-based groups to get involved. “It’s government by press conference,” Oberweis said. “I hope Illinois voters get it.”

Even the Governor's Democratic primary opponent appears opposed to the plan:

"Unfortunately for the children of Illinois, in this election season the governor will use them as props for all sorts of promises," Edwin Eisendrath, Blagojevich's challenger in the March 21 Democratic primary, said in a statement.

Blagojevich To Propose Even More Spending

2006-02-12T10:26:00.000-06:00

The spending addiction afflicting state government does not appear likely to abate any time soon.

Governor Rod Blagojevich, in his most recent attempt to pander to a constituency, is prepared to propose a universal preschool program for children between the ages of three and four. Illinois would become the only state to offer taxpayer-funded preschool for all three-year-olds at an estimated cost of $135 million over the first three years.

Unveiling the program in an election year does at least five things for the Governor. First, it provides him with a program with considerable appeal to middle-class voters who understandably find "free" preschool appealing. Second, it gives him a hammer to moralistically club opponents who, correctly, argue that the state simply cannot continue finding more ways to spend money. Third, he gets to talk about the need to close corporate tax loopholes to raise some of the revenue necessary for the education of children -- always a good populist theme. Fourth, he gets to pander to the powerful teacher unions by promising to hire the hundreds of additional teachers necessary to handle the burgeoning number of children projected to be enrolled in the program. The fifth and final benefit is that the Governor, who probably fancies himself an eventual candidate for national office, gets to trumpet Illinois as a trailblazer in providing universal preschool programs for three-year-olds.

A universal preschool program will be heralded by the Governor, along with his existing All Kids health insurance program, as he seeks to position himself as a viable national candidate advocating Clintonian incrementalist policies. Personally, I think the Governor possibly desires the number two spot on the Democratic ticket in 2008. Before that could happen, he must overcome tremendous and widespread dissatisfaction with his leadership and win reelection in 2006.

Any and every dollar not nailed down needs to be allocated toward the massively underfunded state pension systems. Democratic leaders are once again deciding to ignore prudent fiscal priorities in order to pander for re-election. Meanwhile, the pension train is roaring down the tracks and picking up speed. No gubernatorial candidate of either party can be taken seriously unless they clearly and consistently propose policies to structurally address the underfunded pension systems before it's too late.

More On Voting

2006-02-11T14:10:00.000-06:00

John Fund has a piece in the Wall Street Journal regarding election reform. Of particular interest to me were the following selections:

Last September, a national commission headed by Jimmy Carter and James Baker recommended that all states require a valid photo ID to vote. Indeed, many states are now moving to boost polling safeguards.

Other legislatures are preparing to pass similar photo ID laws based on the recommendations of the Carter-Baker commission. They include Missouri, Ohio, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, although Democratic governors in the last two are poised to veto them.

Which state is conspicuously absent from that list? Just what is Illinois doing to protect the integrity of our voting process? Not a whole lot. Republican State Representative David Reis has introduced a bill to require voters to show a photo ID prior to receiving a ballot. The legislation, HB 4224, is being held in the House Rules Committee where it will probably never see the light of day in the Democrat-controlled General Assembly.

Even Illinois Democratic Senators Dick Durbin and Barak Obama oppose photo identification requirements. Democrats like to couch their opposition to photo ID requirements by invoking the specter of racism and Jim Crow. The truth of the matter is they know that a serious and enforceable photo ID requirement would likely cost them key races in jurisdictions rife with fraud. Just take a look at the co-sponsors of an Obama-sponsored Senate Concurrent Resolution opposing photo ID requirements. There's not a Republican on the list.

Rather than cracking down on voter fraud, Illinois Democrats are finding ways to make cheating easier by opening larger windows for chicanery. Last year the Governor signed two significant election bills into law. Public Act 93-0645 allows voters to cast ballots 18 days prior to election day. Public Act 93-1082 allows voters to register as late as 14 days prior to an election. Republicans overwhelmingly voted against these bills, which passed through both chambers in which Democrats controlled majorities.

New Cook County Voting Technology

2006-02-11T09:17:00.000-06:00

The Tribune has a story about the new voting machines being introduced in Chicago and Cook County to ensure compliance with new federal voting machine standards. Why am I still not confident that vote tallies will end up being more accurate in Cook? That's just not the Chicago way.

I got a kick out of this part of the story:

One thing that won't change in the new voting system is the use of candidate numbers. Although they were created for punch-card ballots, they will still appear next to candidate names.

Election officials say those who are illiterate can use them, plus they are part of the Chicago voting tradition.

Ah, the Chicago voting tradition. Yes, we must preserve that. It's a great tradition. Just ask Richard Nixon. Actually, Cook County is aptly named -- as in "cook the books."

Fiscal Madness

2006-02-10T21:04:00.000-06:00

Question of the day: Who would you most trust to make important decisions with your money. A common drunk or an Illinois politician? The correct answer is, of course, neither.

The State has struggled to balance its budget in recent years, resorting to various gimmicks and one-time fixes to match revenues and expenditures so that the General Assembly could get out of Springfield without having to make any really difficult choices. The Governor and state legislators have been complicit in aggressively raiding state funds earmarked for other purposes, assuming additional bonded debt to provide short-term cost savings for the massively underfunded state pension systems and even skipping the pension payments altogether for the FY' 2006 budget. All the while, the Democrat-controlled state government has somehow managed to "find" additional revenue to throw at their favorite constituencies when they should have been seeking spending cuts. The end result of the succession of smoke-and-mirror budgets has been to further hurtle the state toward an impending and severe fiscal crisis.

Truth be told, the real culprit in Illinois has been profligate, runaway spending. And it really began under Republican Governor George Ryan, whose $12 billion Illinois First infrastructure spending plan allowed him and state legislators of both parties to run wild around the state handing out money like it was going out of style. For obvious reasons, members of both parties loved the guy, even if the public didn't. Democratic Governor Rod Blagojevich has simply picked up where the indicted Ryan left off. A 2005 Heartland Institute article puts Illinois' spending into perspective:

In 1998 Illinois' total budget was about $38 billion. The FY' 2006 budget, passed less than two weeks ago, is $54.4 billion. Or maybe $55 billion. Or maybe $58 billion. All three of those estimates were made by the governor and lawmakers after passing the budget at the end of May. So much pork spending was promised in last-minute backroom deals that no one knew exactly what had been promised or how much it will cost.

Giving lawmakers the benefit of the doubt, let's go with the low estimate of $54.4 billion. That's $16.4 billion more than in 1998--a nearly 50 percent increase in spending. From FY' 2002 to FY' 2005, Illinois increased state spending by 31 percent, according to the National Association of State Budget Officers. The FY' 2006 budget continues that surge.

State spending is growing several times faster than inflation, the state's economy, and family income.

This is why it just boggles the mind that Democratic Governor Rod Blagojevich and Democratic legislative leaders are eager for a $3 billion capital spending plan for infrastructure. What's even more troubling is that Republican legislators appear as if they are seriously contemplating going along with it.