By Jamey Dunn
The Illinois House today approved a bill that supporters say would bring the state's eavesdropping law in line with modern technology.
Senate Bill 1808 would allow people to make audio recordings of police officers who are on duty and in public. Currently, making such a recording without permission is a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison.
The 7th Circuit U.S. Courts of Appeals recently barred enforcement of the law as the court takes up a related case, and a preliminary ruling from the court said that it was likely unconstitutional. Other Illinois courts have ruled that the law is unconstitutional.
Rep. Elaine Nekritz, who sponsors the bill, said that these rulings provide lawmakers with an even more “compelling” reason to change the law. Nekritz made a failed attempt to pass another version of the plan earlier in the legislative session before the 7th Circuit Court issued its injunction. “So now we have three Illinois courts telling us: ‘Illinois General Assembly, your statue is unconstitutional. You need to make changes.’”
This new version of the plan includes a provision that Nekritz, a Northbrook Democrat, said she hopes will ease concerns from some law enforcement officials. The measure would bar using an edited recording to file a complaint against an officer. Nekritz said if a doctored recording were used for a complaint, the issue would be referred to a state’s attorney, who would decide whether the offense warranted a felony or misdemeanor charge.
But opponents said the proposal could endanger officers, police investigations and the people trying to make recordings.
“I think it’s a liability and a safety issue,” said Democratic Rep. Dena Carli, who is also a Chicago Police sergeant. She said she was concerned that police might mistake somebody pulling out a cell phone to record as somebody pulling out a weapon.
Carli said she was worried that people trying to record a situation might get in the way of police because they would have to get close to pick up sound on a recording device. Such crowding could interfere with police work, such as interviewing witnesses at a crime scene. “Video from a distance, that’s fine. You can pick up that video. In order to get that audio, you have to come into close proximity. It’s endangering everybody in that situation.” The current law allows video recording without audio.
Nekritz said that all the laws police currently use to keep people from obstructing their work would still apply, and anyone who interferes with police action would be subject to arrest under such laws.
Supporters of the bill said that it would catch the state law up to address the widespread use of many devices, such as cell phones, that can record audio and video. They say under the current law, people are committing felonies without knowing it simply by doing something that has become a force of habit for many — whipping out a camera phone and recording anything of interest they may see.
“This is a bill whose time has come,” Nekritz said. “I think many of us watched the goings on in downtown Chicago over the weekend with the NATO summit. And you could see the crowds, the police lines, and you could see kids and people with their cell phones held up recording what was going on. … No one would think that that’s really a felony. It’s time we modernize our law and make it consistent with what people expect today.”
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Monday, May 21, 2012
Senate Democrats and Republicans bicker over budget proposal
By Jamey Dunn
A legislative committee approved pieces of a budget plan crafted by Senate Democrats that would tap into special funds to pay down a portion of the state’s massive backlog of overdue bills.
“It’s a very balanced approach which is providing funds for paying unpaid bills that are past overdue,” said Sen. Heather Steans, a budget point person for the Senate Democrats and sponsor of some of their budget proposal. “We very much want to take a tack of getting out our responsibility to the vendors and bringing that number down.” Their proposal calls for about $400 million from sweeping special funds to go toward paying off overdue bills. Senate Democrats say that money, coupled with money from another area of the budget and federal Medicaid matching funds, would reduce the backlog by $1.3 billion. Although the committee approved portions of the Democrats' proposed budget today on votes that split down party lines, they have not yet signed off on the fund sweeps. Democrats are reviewing a long list of more than 500 potential funds that could be targeted.
Steans, a Chicago Democrat, said there are no plans to repay the money that would be swept from special funds. For more on such funds and how they play into the budgeting process, see Illinois Issues April 2012.
But Senate Republicans said Democrats should be considering cuts instead of tapping into other funds. They said they could not support the proposal because it does not put the state on a path to security after the recent income tax increase begins to roll back in 2015. “I believed that we shared brief, shining moment of optimism in the beginning of our talks,” said Sen. Pamela Althoff, a McHenry Republican. “Unfortunately as we tried to progress, we really broke down. Our conversations, they stalled over one basic staunch principle, and that was a promise of the Republican caucus to always craft a spending plan that put the state of Illinois on a trajectory to eliminate the tax increase on schedule. And what we see before us now makes [our] support of this proposal impossible, as we cannot meet that principle.”
Steans said that savings from Medicaid and pension reforms — negotiations on both are currently under way — would create future savings. She said changes to those two areas, combined with an effort to pay down the backlog, could prepare the state’s finances to be sustainable when the tax increase rolls back. “The tax increase is set to roll back in law. It’s going to take a vote of the General Assembly and the governor signing it before we could ever have something other than the tax increase going away. So there is nothing in this that precludes us from having that tax increase go away. I, in fact, believe this very much sets us on the path, so it will be a decision for future general assemblies and governors to decide on what we’re going to do about that,” she said.
Democrats said Republicans are stalling and being obstructive. Steans said that any time an agreement seemed close in negotiations, Republicans “moved the goalpost.”
Another potential sticking point is facility closures. The proposal calls for the closure of the Dwight Correctional Center, the Murray Developmental Center in Centralia, the Jacksonville Developmental Center and the Tinley Park Mental Health Center. While no Republicans spoke out adamantly against the closures at today’s hearings, Republicans on the Commission for Government Forecasting and Accountability, which takes advisory votes on facility closures, have general opposed closing downstate facilities.
Meanwhile, the Illinois House sent a bill to Gov. Pat Quinn today that would eliminate a controversial scholarship plan and another that would make lawmakers and constitutional officers take furlough days and bar them from getting a cost-of-living increase.
The legislative scholarship program lets lawmakers to give tuition waivers for state universities to students within their districts. The program has come scrutiny after reports that some lawmakers gave the scholarships to the children of campaign contributors and political allies.
Those in favor of the program argued that the legislative scholarships are a relatively low-cost way to ensure that some form of financial aid goes to students in every legislative district in the state. The program costs universities about $13.5 million annually. Proponents say that it gives an opportunity to students who might otherwise not get to attend college. Some lawmakers have opted to have independent panels award the scholarships.
Quinn, who has been pushing for the elimination of the program, said he plans to sign House Bill 3810. “Today is a good day for deserving students in financial need and a good day for the taxpayers of Illinois,” he said in a written statement. “There is no place for a political scholarship program in Illinois. As I have repeatedly advocated: Scholarships, paid for by Illinois taxpayers,should be awarded only to those with merit who are in true financial need. Abolishing this program is the right thing to do.”
According to Park Ridge Democratic Sen. Dan Kotowski, sponsor of HB 3188, the furlough days required in the measure would result in a 5 percent pay cut for lawmakers. The proposal also freezes salary levels for legislators and constitutional officers.
A legislative committee approved pieces of a budget plan crafted by Senate Democrats that would tap into special funds to pay down a portion of the state’s massive backlog of overdue bills.
“It’s a very balanced approach which is providing funds for paying unpaid bills that are past overdue,” said Sen. Heather Steans, a budget point person for the Senate Democrats and sponsor of some of their budget proposal. “We very much want to take a tack of getting out our responsibility to the vendors and bringing that number down.” Their proposal calls for about $400 million from sweeping special funds to go toward paying off overdue bills. Senate Democrats say that money, coupled with money from another area of the budget and federal Medicaid matching funds, would reduce the backlog by $1.3 billion. Although the committee approved portions of the Democrats' proposed budget today on votes that split down party lines, they have not yet signed off on the fund sweeps. Democrats are reviewing a long list of more than 500 potential funds that could be targeted.
Steans, a Chicago Democrat, said there are no plans to repay the money that would be swept from special funds. For more on such funds and how they play into the budgeting process, see Illinois Issues April 2012.
But Senate Republicans said Democrats should be considering cuts instead of tapping into other funds. They said they could not support the proposal because it does not put the state on a path to security after the recent income tax increase begins to roll back in 2015. “I believed that we shared brief, shining moment of optimism in the beginning of our talks,” said Sen. Pamela Althoff, a McHenry Republican. “Unfortunately as we tried to progress, we really broke down. Our conversations, they stalled over one basic staunch principle, and that was a promise of the Republican caucus to always craft a spending plan that put the state of Illinois on a trajectory to eliminate the tax increase on schedule. And what we see before us now makes [our] support of this proposal impossible, as we cannot meet that principle.”
Steans said that savings from Medicaid and pension reforms — negotiations on both are currently under way — would create future savings. She said changes to those two areas, combined with an effort to pay down the backlog, could prepare the state’s finances to be sustainable when the tax increase rolls back. “The tax increase is set to roll back in law. It’s going to take a vote of the General Assembly and the governor signing it before we could ever have something other than the tax increase going away. So there is nothing in this that precludes us from having that tax increase go away. I, in fact, believe this very much sets us on the path, so it will be a decision for future general assemblies and governors to decide on what we’re going to do about that,” she said.
Democrats said Republicans are stalling and being obstructive. Steans said that any time an agreement seemed close in negotiations, Republicans “moved the goalpost.”
Another potential sticking point is facility closures. The proposal calls for the closure of the Dwight Correctional Center, the Murray Developmental Center in Centralia, the Jacksonville Developmental Center and the Tinley Park Mental Health Center. While no Republicans spoke out adamantly against the closures at today’s hearings, Republicans on the Commission for Government Forecasting and Accountability, which takes advisory votes on facility closures, have general opposed closing downstate facilities.
Meanwhile, the Illinois House sent a bill to Gov. Pat Quinn today that would eliminate a controversial scholarship plan and another that would make lawmakers and constitutional officers take furlough days and bar them from getting a cost-of-living increase.
The legislative scholarship program lets lawmakers to give tuition waivers for state universities to students within their districts. The program has come scrutiny after reports that some lawmakers gave the scholarships to the children of campaign contributors and political allies.
Those in favor of the program argued that the legislative scholarships are a relatively low-cost way to ensure that some form of financial aid goes to students in every legislative district in the state. The program costs universities about $13.5 million annually. Proponents say that it gives an opportunity to students who might otherwise not get to attend college. Some lawmakers have opted to have independent panels award the scholarships.
Quinn, who has been pushing for the elimination of the program, said he plans to sign House Bill 3810. “Today is a good day for deserving students in financial need and a good day for the taxpayers of Illinois,” he said in a written statement. “There is no place for a political scholarship program in Illinois. As I have repeatedly advocated: Scholarships, paid for by Illinois taxpayers,should be awarded only to those with merit who are in true financial need. Abolishing this program is the right thing to do.”
According to Park Ridge Democratic Sen. Dan Kotowski, sponsor of HB 3188, the furlough days required in the measure would result in a 5 percent pay cut for lawmakers. The proposal also freezes salary levels for legislators and constitutional officers.
Cigarette tax is the linchpin for Medicaid reform plan
By Jamey Dunn and Ashley Griffin
One component of a proposal that lawmakers say would eliminate $2.7 billion in Medicaid liability was released today, and Democrats are optimistic that legislators can reach an agreement before session is scheduled to adjourn at the end of the month.
Senate Bill 2840 contains many of the cuts to Medicaid services previously suggested by Gov. Pat Quinn. The measure would:
Feigenholtz, a Chicago Democrat, estimates that the rate reduction in the bill would result in $240 million in savings. Supporters of SB 2840 say they expect it to cut $1.4 billion to $1.6 billion out of the state’s Medicaid liability. “The bill that we have right now is about $1.6 billion in cuts and rate reductions and program efficiencies. Then, the cigarette tax is about $700 million [with a federal match]; there’s another $100 million from an expanded assessment. The assessment gets more than that [in total], but another $100 million will go to fill the $2.7 billion problem,” said Sen. Heather Steans, who was also a part of the legislative working group. “And then we also did a supplementary [appropriation] to pay unpaid Medicaid bills this year of $300 million, which we already passed [last week], so it’s all those things that add up to the $2.7 billion.
Feigenholtz and Steans said the plan relies on the approval of a cigarette tax. “If the cigarette tax doesn’t pass, we are going to have to go back to the drawing board and cut a lot of human services things that are very important to us, like taking care of the elderly [and] child care. It is going to blow a massive hole into the human services budget.” The proposed $1-a-pack increase is not in Senate Bill 2840. Steans, a Chicago Democrat, said she expects the tax legislation to surface in the next few days. Backers of the proposal also hope to rework the hospital assessment — which is an accounting practice that the state uses to leverage federal funds — to bring in $100 million more next fiscal year, which begins July 1. Steans said she hopes to have the whole plan approved by the end of the week, so lawmakers can move on to considering the budget. “The goal is to do it this week or try to finish it up by the end of this week. We have to turn over the budget by the [May] 31st deadline.”
When asked if she was confident that overall plan could find the needed support to pass, Feigenholtz said: “You know what, I am. I really am. I think that there was solidarity. I think it was tough, but everybody working in earnest together toward a common goal. …It’s time that we call the bill and have public debate about it.” But at least publicly, some Republicans are not warming to a cigarette tax increase. “I do not like the cigarette tax. There’s a lot of discussion going on right now as to what’s going to change in the bill and what’s going to be there. I don’t think the bill is going to be in the same form that it’s in today, I don’t know what its going to be,” said Hinsdale Republican Rep. Patricia Bellock, who was also a part of the legislative working groups.
Some Republicans are supporting a proposal from the Illinois Policy Institute, a think tank dedicated to “supporting free market principles,” which they say can cut the Medicaid liability by $2.7 billion without rate reductions or a tax increase. “The governor and the members of the House and the Senate agreed that it was imperative to find $2.7 billion in Medicaid savings. The plan that is being proposed and discussed by lawmakers unfortunately fails to live up to that promise. Instead, tax hikes and rate cuts are being substituted for reform,” Sen. Kyle McCarter, a Republican from Lebanon, said today at a news conference to promote the plan.
But advocates and experts warn that deep cuts look like savings on paper but could cost the state more in the long run. They say that cuts to preventative services can land patients, who would get sicker without maintenance care, in emergency rooms where care would cost more. Jim Duffett, executive director of the Campaign for Better Health Care, said that even the plan based around SB 2840, which would offset some cuts with new revenue, would likely cause such problems. “If you don’t get your oil changed, it’s going to cost you more later.” He said that rolling back services does not mean that people will not need care, and the costs that providers incur would instead be shifted elsewhere, possibly to insurance companies and down the pipe to their customers. “For many of us that do have health insurance, we are going to end up seeing those costs continue to increase.”
Duffet called today’s plan a “numbers game” that does not consider the possibility that cuts to such services as dental care and in-home care could lead to greater expenses, such as increased hospitalizations, for the Medicaid program down the line. “This is a bottom line budget figure that folks need to have.” Duffett said that lawmakers should look at the budget as a whole and consider alternatives, such as eliminating tax breaks for businesses, to bring in more revenues. “There are a few things in here that are positive, but the $1.4 billion in cuts to the most vulnerable in our view just doesn’t make sense,” he said.
Feigenholtz said the plan is not perfect, but she said lawmakers did their best try to protect Medicaid patients while also creating a piece of legislation that may be able to pass in the General Assembly. “We understand how important it is to the most vulnerable people in the state of Illinois. It was a lot of work to try and protect those people, the poor the elderly and children. We’re hoping at the end of the day that’s what we’re achieving.”
One component of a proposal that lawmakers say would eliminate $2.7 billion in Medicaid liability was released today, and Democrats are optimistic that legislators can reach an agreement before session is scheduled to adjourn at the end of the month.
Senate Bill 2840 contains many of the cuts to Medicaid services previously suggested by Gov. Pat Quinn. The measure would:
- Eliminate coverage for group therapy for nursing home residents, chiropractic care for adults and in-patient detoxification programs.
- Eliminate the Illinois Cares Rx program, which helps seniors pay for prescription drugs.
- Require a $2 copay for prescription drugs
- Cap hearing, speech, occupational and physical therapy at 20 sessions. Eliminate adult dental care except for in emergency situations.
- Limit patients to four prescriptions per month. Three of the prescriptions can be brand name drugs. Limit patients to one pair of eyeglasses every two years ,.
- Require prior approval for the repair or replacement of equipment, such as prostheses and wheelchairs
Feigenholtz, a Chicago Democrat, estimates that the rate reduction in the bill would result in $240 million in savings. Supporters of SB 2840 say they expect it to cut $1.4 billion to $1.6 billion out of the state’s Medicaid liability. “The bill that we have right now is about $1.6 billion in cuts and rate reductions and program efficiencies. Then, the cigarette tax is about $700 million [with a federal match]; there’s another $100 million from an expanded assessment. The assessment gets more than that [in total], but another $100 million will go to fill the $2.7 billion problem,” said Sen. Heather Steans, who was also a part of the legislative working group. “And then we also did a supplementary [appropriation] to pay unpaid Medicaid bills this year of $300 million, which we already passed [last week], so it’s all those things that add up to the $2.7 billion.
Feigenholtz and Steans said the plan relies on the approval of a cigarette tax. “If the cigarette tax doesn’t pass, we are going to have to go back to the drawing board and cut a lot of human services things that are very important to us, like taking care of the elderly [and] child care. It is going to blow a massive hole into the human services budget.” The proposed $1-a-pack increase is not in Senate Bill 2840. Steans, a Chicago Democrat, said she expects the tax legislation to surface in the next few days. Backers of the proposal also hope to rework the hospital assessment — which is an accounting practice that the state uses to leverage federal funds — to bring in $100 million more next fiscal year, which begins July 1. Steans said she hopes to have the whole plan approved by the end of the week, so lawmakers can move on to considering the budget. “The goal is to do it this week or try to finish it up by the end of this week. We have to turn over the budget by the [May] 31st deadline.”
When asked if she was confident that overall plan could find the needed support to pass, Feigenholtz said: “You know what, I am. I really am. I think that there was solidarity. I think it was tough, but everybody working in earnest together toward a common goal. …It’s time that we call the bill and have public debate about it.” But at least publicly, some Republicans are not warming to a cigarette tax increase. “I do not like the cigarette tax. There’s a lot of discussion going on right now as to what’s going to change in the bill and what’s going to be there. I don’t think the bill is going to be in the same form that it’s in today, I don’t know what its going to be,” said Hinsdale Republican Rep. Patricia Bellock, who was also a part of the legislative working groups.
Some Republicans are supporting a proposal from the Illinois Policy Institute, a think tank dedicated to “supporting free market principles,” which they say can cut the Medicaid liability by $2.7 billion without rate reductions or a tax increase. “The governor and the members of the House and the Senate agreed that it was imperative to find $2.7 billion in Medicaid savings. The plan that is being proposed and discussed by lawmakers unfortunately fails to live up to that promise. Instead, tax hikes and rate cuts are being substituted for reform,” Sen. Kyle McCarter, a Republican from Lebanon, said today at a news conference to promote the plan.
But advocates and experts warn that deep cuts look like savings on paper but could cost the state more in the long run. They say that cuts to preventative services can land patients, who would get sicker without maintenance care, in emergency rooms where care would cost more. Jim Duffett, executive director of the Campaign for Better Health Care, said that even the plan based around SB 2840, which would offset some cuts with new revenue, would likely cause such problems. “If you don’t get your oil changed, it’s going to cost you more later.” He said that rolling back services does not mean that people will not need care, and the costs that providers incur would instead be shifted elsewhere, possibly to insurance companies and down the pipe to their customers. “For many of us that do have health insurance, we are going to end up seeing those costs continue to increase.”
Duffet called today’s plan a “numbers game” that does not consider the possibility that cuts to such services as dental care and in-home care could lead to greater expenses, such as increased hospitalizations, for the Medicaid program down the line. “This is a bottom line budget figure that folks need to have.” Duffett said that lawmakers should look at the budget as a whole and consider alternatives, such as eliminating tax breaks for businesses, to bring in more revenues. “There are a few things in here that are positive, but the $1.4 billion in cuts to the most vulnerable in our view just doesn’t make sense,” he said.
Feigenholtz said the plan is not perfect, but she said lawmakers did their best try to protect Medicaid patients while also creating a piece of legislation that may be able to pass in the General Assembly. “We understand how important it is to the most vulnerable people in the state of Illinois. It was a lot of work to try and protect those people, the poor the elderly and children. We’re hoping at the end of the day that’s what we’re achieving.”
Friday, May 18, 2012
Senate Democrats say they are optimistic about Medicaid reform as they release a budget plan
By Jamey Dunn
Senate Democrats say they are confident that a proposal to address $1.7 billion in Medicaid growth will emerge soon, and they released a rough outline of their budget plan today based on that assumption.
“This is a budget that represents our commitment of the Senate Democratic caucus to have a budget that balances, that shows how we’re living within our means in the state, and that we’re funding programs based on priorities and that we have a commitment to paying off bills. So it represents the kind of budget that we think taxpayers want to see,” said Sen. Dan Kotowski, a Park Ridge Democrat. “We’re completely staying within the line of revenue [expected to come in next fiscal year]; we’re not going above it. We’re making significant cuts across the board. We’re also funding key priorities.”
The Senate Democrats are working from the same $33.7 billion revenue estimate that the House approved. Under the proposal, before state officials could consider how much to spend on operations, they would have to make the pension payment, which is $5.1 billion plus $11 million for the Chicago Teacher Pension Fund, the group health insurance payment, which is $1.17 billion, factor in Medicaid spending, which is $6.6 billion, and use $1.3 billion to pay down old bills. That would leave $16.85 billion for day-to-day costs. That would mean that the Senate Democrats are proposing more than $500 million in operational spending above the House’s numbers, which were approved in a resolution.
However, Senate Democrats said their proposal spends $317 million less on state operations than the current fiscal year’s budget and $248 million less than Quinn’s proposal for fiscal year 2013. The plan would hold K-12 education spending flat but would cut virtually all other areas of state spending:
But one Senate Republican said the plan would spend too much and would not put the state on track for fiscal security when the income tax increase is scheduled to roll back in 2015. Sen. Matt Murphy, a Palatine Republican, said members of his party want to base the budget off of projections of what revenue would be after the tax increase is reduced. Murphy said that would be between $31.5 billion and $31.7 billion. “This [plan] is spending significantly above the House resolution. It’s above the governor[‘s plan]. It’s the highest proposal of spending anywhere under this dome right now. So this will not get us on the path to reducing the tax increase. It will put us on the path for, frankly, needing another,” Murphy said.
While the Senate Democrats call for less operational spending than Quinn, they are proposing that more money to go toward paying off old bills. “We’re setting aside a lot more dollars [than Quinn] to pay down unpaid bill,” Chicago Democratic Sen. Heather Steans said. “And that was a real priority for our caucus. We have a lot of nonprofits and other vendors out there who are not getting paid — school districts, all sorts of local governments. And we felt strongly that we really need to start bringing down those unpaid bill levels. So we’ve made that a priority.”
Democrats said their budget does not spend more than what the state would bring in. Steans said Medicaid reform, pension reform and the backlog all need to be tackled to ensure the state’s budget is in good shape when the tax increase rolls back. “It is this three-legged stool here to get us in that position. … I think we’re going to have to see how that all comes together,” she said.
The Senate Democrats' proposal would draw money from areas of the state’s budget outside of the General Revenue Fund. In addition to the money being set aside to pay down the backlog, Senate Democrats are calling for more than $400 million be taken from special funds to pay overdue bills. Democrats say the fund sweeps they are proposing would be a one-time move to pay off old bills and would leave enough money in the funds to ensure that they are operational for their original purposes.
They are also proposing that less money be transferred out of GRF. More than $1 billion is automatically transferred out of GRF and into other funds each year. Those transfers are traditionally not a part of the debate over the annual budget. Kotowski said that under the Democrats’ plan, about $110 million of those transfers would instead be used for GRF spending. For example, in the proposal there would be no growth to the Local Distributive Fund, which funnels money — some of it automatically transferred from GRF — to local governments. Steans said holding the transfer flat would mean that $26 million could be spent elsewhere. “There’s numbers of items that really don’t usually get scrutinized, so we’re looking at those and making reductions to a number of the other ones,” she said. (For more on special funds and statutory transfers and how they play into the budgeting process, see Illinois Issues April 2012.)
Steans, who is also working on Medicaid negotiations, said she is optimistic that a deal to stave off $2.7 billion in Medicaid growth may be reached by next week. She did not give specifics on a proposal, but she did say that a cigarette tax increase is still on the table. “We are diligently working towards an agreement on [Medicaid], and I think we will hopefully make progress on that next week.”
Senate Democrats say they hope to have budget bills based on their plan filed and moving through the legislative process next week.
Senate Democrats say they are confident that a proposal to address $1.7 billion in Medicaid growth will emerge soon, and they released a rough outline of their budget plan today based on that assumption.
“This is a budget that represents our commitment of the Senate Democratic caucus to have a budget that balances, that shows how we’re living within our means in the state, and that we’re funding programs based on priorities and that we have a commitment to paying off bills. So it represents the kind of budget that we think taxpayers want to see,” said Sen. Dan Kotowski, a Park Ridge Democrat. “We’re completely staying within the line of revenue [expected to come in next fiscal year]; we’re not going above it. We’re making significant cuts across the board. We’re also funding key priorities.”
The Senate Democrats are working from the same $33.7 billion revenue estimate that the House approved. Under the proposal, before state officials could consider how much to spend on operations, they would have to make the pension payment, which is $5.1 billion plus $11 million for the Chicago Teacher Pension Fund, the group health insurance payment, which is $1.17 billion, factor in Medicaid spending, which is $6.6 billion, and use $1.3 billion to pay down old bills. That would leave $16.85 billion for day-to-day costs. That would mean that the Senate Democrats are proposing more than $500 million in operational spending above the House’s numbers, which were approved in a resolution.
However, Senate Democrats said their proposal spends $317 million less on state operations than the current fiscal year’s budget and $248 million less than Quinn’s proposal for fiscal year 2013. The plan would hold K-12 education spending flat but would cut virtually all other areas of state spending:
- General services would see a $68 million reduction.
- Higher education would be cut by $48.5 million.
- Human services would be reduced $44.9 million.
- Public safety would take the biggest hit with a $156 million reduction.
But one Senate Republican said the plan would spend too much and would not put the state on track for fiscal security when the income tax increase is scheduled to roll back in 2015. Sen. Matt Murphy, a Palatine Republican, said members of his party want to base the budget off of projections of what revenue would be after the tax increase is reduced. Murphy said that would be between $31.5 billion and $31.7 billion. “This [plan] is spending significantly above the House resolution. It’s above the governor[‘s plan]. It’s the highest proposal of spending anywhere under this dome right now. So this will not get us on the path to reducing the tax increase. It will put us on the path for, frankly, needing another,” Murphy said.
While the Senate Democrats call for less operational spending than Quinn, they are proposing that more money to go toward paying off old bills. “We’re setting aside a lot more dollars [than Quinn] to pay down unpaid bill,” Chicago Democratic Sen. Heather Steans said. “And that was a real priority for our caucus. We have a lot of nonprofits and other vendors out there who are not getting paid — school districts, all sorts of local governments. And we felt strongly that we really need to start bringing down those unpaid bill levels. So we’ve made that a priority.”
Democrats said their budget does not spend more than what the state would bring in. Steans said Medicaid reform, pension reform and the backlog all need to be tackled to ensure the state’s budget is in good shape when the tax increase rolls back. “It is this three-legged stool here to get us in that position. … I think we’re going to have to see how that all comes together,” she said.
The Senate Democrats' proposal would draw money from areas of the state’s budget outside of the General Revenue Fund. In addition to the money being set aside to pay down the backlog, Senate Democrats are calling for more than $400 million be taken from special funds to pay overdue bills. Democrats say the fund sweeps they are proposing would be a one-time move to pay off old bills and would leave enough money in the funds to ensure that they are operational for their original purposes.
They are also proposing that less money be transferred out of GRF. More than $1 billion is automatically transferred out of GRF and into other funds each year. Those transfers are traditionally not a part of the debate over the annual budget. Kotowski said that under the Democrats’ plan, about $110 million of those transfers would instead be used for GRF spending. For example, in the proposal there would be no growth to the Local Distributive Fund, which funnels money — some of it automatically transferred from GRF — to local governments. Steans said holding the transfer flat would mean that $26 million could be spent elsewhere. “There’s numbers of items that really don’t usually get scrutinized, so we’re looking at those and making reductions to a number of the other ones,” she said. (For more on special funds and statutory transfers and how they play into the budgeting process, see Illinois Issues April 2012.)
Steans, who is also working on Medicaid negotiations, said she is optimistic that a deal to stave off $2.7 billion in Medicaid growth may be reached by next week. She did not give specifics on a proposal, but she did say that a cigarette tax increase is still on the table. “We are diligently working towards an agreement on [Medicaid], and I think we will hopefully make progress on that next week.”
Senate Democrats say they hope to have budget bills based on their plan filed and moving through the legislative process next week.
Quinn signs off on money for child-care providers
By Ashley Griffin
Child-care providers throughout Illinois can count on state funding through the end of the current fiscal year, but cuts are still on the horizon for next year.
On Friday, the Senate approved and Gov. Pat Quinn signed a supplemental appropriations bill that contains $73.6 million to pay providers and $151 million to pay down overdue Medicaid bills. Senate Bill 2450 passed with 46 “yes” votes and zero “no” votes. The bill would use unspent Fiscal Year 2012 funds to pay Medicaid bills, then direct the federal match that comes with Medicaid spending toward paying child-care providers for looking after low-income children. The House approved the proposal earlier this week.
The governor’s office had notified child-care providers that payments would be delayed until July. The move to delay the payments could affect up to 40,000 child-care providers and 85,000 low-income families. According to Kelly Kraft, a spokesperson for Quinn, the shortfall in child-care money was caused because an increased number of Illinoisans’ needed Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), which is paid out of the same fund. “We are encouraged legislators understand that just because reductions in the budget are made it does not mean the need goes away. This fiscal year we experienced a dramatic increase in demand for TANF... cases. TANF, along with child care are funded through the same line, and federal law mandates the state pay TANF first. Due to that unexpected increase in TANF, the state developed a $73.6 million shortage in funding available for child care. We have worked diligently with lawmakers over the last several months to make certain they were aware of the impending shortfall and the need to address it. This legislation restores that funding and ensures that the tens of thousands of Illinois residents who benefit from child care are not forced to choose between going to work and caring for their children,” Kraft said in a written statement.
Although funding will be restored for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2012, under Quinn’s FY '13 proposed budget, the program would see an $85 million reduction.
“We applaud lawmakers for sparing child-care providers and the parents who rely on these vital programs from a potentially crippling three-month delay in payments this year,” Keith Kelleher, president of SEIU Healthcare Illinois and Indiana said in a prepared statement. The union represents a number of child-care providers. “We must fully fund the child-care system in Illinois and keep working families on the job and in school where they can contribute to our economic growth.”
The proposal to fund the program through the end of the fiscal year was supported by the vast majority of lawmakers, but Republicans took the opportunity to criticize the way the state budget is crafted. “We need to do this -- we all know we need to do this -- but i'ts kind of interesting again for some of us who have been here awhile that when we really, really, really need to, we can always find a place to move money around,” said Sen. Carole Pankau, a Republican from Itasca. “But maybe it's time that we spent some extra time taking that fine-tooth comb to the budget as we go forward.”
Child-care providers throughout Illinois can count on state funding through the end of the current fiscal year, but cuts are still on the horizon for next year.
On Friday, the Senate approved and Gov. Pat Quinn signed a supplemental appropriations bill that contains $73.6 million to pay providers and $151 million to pay down overdue Medicaid bills. Senate Bill 2450 passed with 46 “yes” votes and zero “no” votes. The bill would use unspent Fiscal Year 2012 funds to pay Medicaid bills, then direct the federal match that comes with Medicaid spending toward paying child-care providers for looking after low-income children. The House approved the proposal earlier this week.
The governor’s office had notified child-care providers that payments would be delayed until July. The move to delay the payments could affect up to 40,000 child-care providers and 85,000 low-income families. According to Kelly Kraft, a spokesperson for Quinn, the shortfall in child-care money was caused because an increased number of Illinoisans’ needed Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), which is paid out of the same fund. “We are encouraged legislators understand that just because reductions in the budget are made it does not mean the need goes away. This fiscal year we experienced a dramatic increase in demand for TANF... cases. TANF, along with child care are funded through the same line, and federal law mandates the state pay TANF first. Due to that unexpected increase in TANF, the state developed a $73.6 million shortage in funding available for child care. We have worked diligently with lawmakers over the last several months to make certain they were aware of the impending shortfall and the need to address it. This legislation restores that funding and ensures that the tens of thousands of Illinois residents who benefit from child care are not forced to choose between going to work and caring for their children,” Kraft said in a written statement.
Although funding will be restored for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2012, under Quinn’s FY '13 proposed budget, the program would see an $85 million reduction.
“We applaud lawmakers for sparing child-care providers and the parents who rely on these vital programs from a potentially crippling three-month delay in payments this year,” Keith Kelleher, president of SEIU Healthcare Illinois and Indiana said in a prepared statement. The union represents a number of child-care providers. “We must fully fund the child-care system in Illinois and keep working families on the job and in school where they can contribute to our economic growth.”
The proposal to fund the program through the end of the fiscal year was supported by the vast majority of lawmakers, but Republicans took the opportunity to criticize the way the state budget is crafted. “We need to do this -- we all know we need to do this -- but i'ts kind of interesting again for some of us who have been here awhile that when we really, really, really need to, we can always find a place to move money around,” said Sen. Carole Pankau, a Republican from Itasca. “But maybe it's time that we spent some extra time taking that fine-tooth comb to the budget as we go forward.”
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Legislative roundup
While comprehensive pension reform and Medicaid reform plans have yet to emerge in the form of legislation, lawmakers did take up several issues this week.
Minimum wage
Senate Bill 1565 would increase the state’s minimum wage, which is currently $8.25, by 50 cents per year until it reached $10.55. At that point, it would be tied to inflation. A Senate committee approved the measure this week.
Proponents say the increase would ensure that wages keep pace with inflation and would help lift the working poor out of poverty. “If you’re willing to work a 40-hour week, you shouldn’t live in poverty,” said Maywood Democratic Sen. Kimberly Lightford, who sponsors the bill. Opponents say that small businesses cannot absorb such an increase, and it would instead result in increased prices, reduced hours for workers and layoffs. “We operate on a very slim margin,” Kelly Wingard said. Wingard and her husband own the Wildflour Artisan Bakery & Cafe in Decatur.
Campaign finance
Senate Bill 3722 would allow candidates in Illinois to ignore contribution limits when outside groups spend money in a race. If an outside group spends more than $100,000 campaigning for a single candidate in a municipal race or a bid for the state legislature, then candidates in that race would not have to stick limits on how much money they can accept from donors. In a statewide race, the threshold would be $250,000 spent by an outside group.
The bill is a response to a recent court ruling that allows political action committees (PACs) to take unlimited contributions as long as their campaign efforts are not coordinated with any candidates. When a group uses funds for campaigning, such as purchasing air time for a commercial, separately from a candidate's effort,s it is known as an independent expenditure. Proponents of the measure, which was approved by a House committee this week, say it would give candidates a fighting chance against PACs, which can collect money without limits. Opponents say it scales back the state’s recent campaign finance reform. They say it would encourage outside groups to spend enough money in a race to free their chosen candidate — along with everybody else in the race — from contribution limits. It heated races, the measure could have the effect of making the state’s contribution limits a thing of the past.
Legislative scholarships
House Bill 3810 would eliminate the controversial legislative scholarship program, which allows lawmakers to hand out state university tuition waivers to students in their districts. The program came under scrutiny after media reports revealed that lawmakers had awarded scholarships to the children of campaign donors or politically connected families. Supporters of the program say it is an equitable way to distribute financial aid throughout the state and gives opportunities to students who may not have otherwise been able to attend college. The measure also calls for the creation of a task force to assess all other university tuition waivers. The bill has passed in the Senate and a House committee approved it this morning. The House left without taking it up for a floor vote.
Strip club tax
House Bill 1645 would charge a tax on strip clubs that sell or allow alcohol. Revenues from the tax would go to fund rape crisis centers. Clubs would have the option or paying $3 per customer or a flat rate based on how much money the bring in. Under the measure, which was approved by a Senate committee this week, clubs that make more than $2 million a year would be charged $25,000. Clubs that make between $500,000 to $2 million would pay $15,000 in tax. Those that make less than $500,000 would pay $5,000.
Speeding
Senate Bill 2888 would bar drivers caught going 31 miles per hour over the speed limit on a highway and drivers caught going 25 miles per hour over the speed limit in an urban area from being eligible for court supervision. The bill was previously approved by the Senate and passed in the House this week. It awaits a decision from Gov. Pat Quinn.
Shark fin ban
House Bill 4119 would ban shark fins in the state. Shark fins are used in a soup that is considered a delicacy in China. But the fins are often harvested in a manner that is considered cruel and leaves the shark to die. Other states have banned shark fins or are considering bans. The measure was approved in the Senate last month and passed in the House this week.
Minimum wage
Senate Bill 1565 would increase the state’s minimum wage, which is currently $8.25, by 50 cents per year until it reached $10.55. At that point, it would be tied to inflation. A Senate committee approved the measure this week.
Proponents say the increase would ensure that wages keep pace with inflation and would help lift the working poor out of poverty. “If you’re willing to work a 40-hour week, you shouldn’t live in poverty,” said Maywood Democratic Sen. Kimberly Lightford, who sponsors the bill. Opponents say that small businesses cannot absorb such an increase, and it would instead result in increased prices, reduced hours for workers and layoffs. “We operate on a very slim margin,” Kelly Wingard said. Wingard and her husband own the Wildflour Artisan Bakery & Cafe in Decatur.
Campaign finance
Senate Bill 3722 would allow candidates in Illinois to ignore contribution limits when outside groups spend money in a race. If an outside group spends more than $100,000 campaigning for a single candidate in a municipal race or a bid for the state legislature, then candidates in that race would not have to stick limits on how much money they can accept from donors. In a statewide race, the threshold would be $250,000 spent by an outside group.
The bill is a response to a recent court ruling that allows political action committees (PACs) to take unlimited contributions as long as their campaign efforts are not coordinated with any candidates. When a group uses funds for campaigning, such as purchasing air time for a commercial, separately from a candidate's effort,s it is known as an independent expenditure. Proponents of the measure, which was approved by a House committee this week, say it would give candidates a fighting chance against PACs, which can collect money without limits. Opponents say it scales back the state’s recent campaign finance reform. They say it would encourage outside groups to spend enough money in a race to free their chosen candidate — along with everybody else in the race — from contribution limits. It heated races, the measure could have the effect of making the state’s contribution limits a thing of the past.
Legislative scholarships
House Bill 3810 would eliminate the controversial legislative scholarship program, which allows lawmakers to hand out state university tuition waivers to students in their districts. The program came under scrutiny after media reports revealed that lawmakers had awarded scholarships to the children of campaign donors or politically connected families. Supporters of the program say it is an equitable way to distribute financial aid throughout the state and gives opportunities to students who may not have otherwise been able to attend college. The measure also calls for the creation of a task force to assess all other university tuition waivers. The bill has passed in the Senate and a House committee approved it this morning. The House left without taking it up for a floor vote.
Strip club tax
House Bill 1645 would charge a tax on strip clubs that sell or allow alcohol. Revenues from the tax would go to fund rape crisis centers. Clubs would have the option or paying $3 per customer or a flat rate based on how much money the bring in. Under the measure, which was approved by a Senate committee this week, clubs that make more than $2 million a year would be charged $25,000. Clubs that make between $500,000 to $2 million would pay $15,000 in tax. Those that make less than $500,000 would pay $5,000.
Speeding
Senate Bill 2888 would bar drivers caught going 31 miles per hour over the speed limit on a highway and drivers caught going 25 miles per hour over the speed limit in an urban area from being eligible for court supervision. The bill was previously approved by the Senate and passed in the House this week. It awaits a decision from Gov. Pat Quinn.
Shark fin ban
House Bill 4119 would ban shark fins in the state. Shark fins are used in a soup that is considered a delicacy in China. But the fins are often harvested in a manner that is considered cruel and leaves the shark to die. Other states have banned shark fins or are considering bans. The measure was approved in the Senate last month and passed in the House this week.
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Republicans blame Quinn for child-care funding shortfall
By Ashley Griffin
Child-care providers in the state are one step closer to being certain that they will receive state payments through the end of the fiscal year.
The Illinois House approved a supplemental appropriations bill today that contains $73.6 million to pay providers and $151 million to pay down overdue Medicaid bills. Senate Bill 2450 passed with 113 “yes” votes and 3 “no” votes. Gov. Pat Quinn’s office had notified child-care providers that state payments, which help cover costs of the care for low-income children, would be delayed until July. A delay in payments would affect up to 40,000 child-care providers and 85,000 low-income families.
Although lawmakers may approve a solution to ease the funding crisis in the coming days, some blamed the governor for fiscal mismanagement.
“We appropriated that money, the governor shorted another line and used your money to fund that line,” House Minority Leader Tom Cross said to child-care providers watching the vote from the House gallery. “He used you, and we’re going to take care of it. But we can’t let that go on anymore.” Some Republicans accused Quinn of intentionally underfunding the program so there would be a reason to ask for more money. They said that the move erodes trust as they are working with the governor on the budget for next fiscal year.
But Quinn’s office said the shortage of funds came from an increase in the need for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which is paid for out of the same fund. The TANF program has seen an 80 percent increase in enrollment since 2009. “We are encouraged legislators understand that just because reductions in the budget are made, it does not mean the need goes away,” Kelly Kraft, a spokeswoman for the governor's budget office, said in a prepared statement. “This fiscal year we experienced a dramatic increase in demand for TANF cases. TANF, along with child care, are funded through the same line, and federal law mandates the state pay TANF first. Due to that unexpected increase in TANF, the state developed a $73.6 million shortage in funding available for child care. The legislation passed by the House calls for that funding to be restored, ensuring that the tens of thousands of Illinois residents who benefit from child care are not forced to choose between going to work and caring for their children. Unspent general revenue funds from this fiscal year will be used to fund the child-care program.”
However, Quinn's proposed Fiscal Year 2013 budget calls for $85 million in cuts to the Child Care Assistance Program, which already has some lawmakers thinking in advance on how to handle the program for next year. “We can try to predict caseloads better. … So we can avoid this kind or problem for FY13,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, who chairs the House Human Services Budgeting Committee.
Child-care providers in the state are one step closer to being certain that they will receive state payments through the end of the fiscal year.
The Illinois House approved a supplemental appropriations bill today that contains $73.6 million to pay providers and $151 million to pay down overdue Medicaid bills. Senate Bill 2450 passed with 113 “yes” votes and 3 “no” votes. Gov. Pat Quinn’s office had notified child-care providers that state payments, which help cover costs of the care for low-income children, would be delayed until July. A delay in payments would affect up to 40,000 child-care providers and 85,000 low-income families.
Although lawmakers may approve a solution to ease the funding crisis in the coming days, some blamed the governor for fiscal mismanagement.
“We appropriated that money, the governor shorted another line and used your money to fund that line,” House Minority Leader Tom Cross said to child-care providers watching the vote from the House gallery. “He used you, and we’re going to take care of it. But we can’t let that go on anymore.” Some Republicans accused Quinn of intentionally underfunding the program so there would be a reason to ask for more money. They said that the move erodes trust as they are working with the governor on the budget for next fiscal year.
But Quinn’s office said the shortage of funds came from an increase in the need for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which is paid for out of the same fund. The TANF program has seen an 80 percent increase in enrollment since 2009. “We are encouraged legislators understand that just because reductions in the budget are made, it does not mean the need goes away,” Kelly Kraft, a spokeswoman for the governor's budget office, said in a prepared statement. “This fiscal year we experienced a dramatic increase in demand for TANF cases. TANF, along with child care, are funded through the same line, and federal law mandates the state pay TANF first. Due to that unexpected increase in TANF, the state developed a $73.6 million shortage in funding available for child care. The legislation passed by the House calls for that funding to be restored, ensuring that the tens of thousands of Illinois residents who benefit from child care are not forced to choose between going to work and caring for their children. Unspent general revenue funds from this fiscal year will be used to fund the child-care program.”
However, Quinn's proposed Fiscal Year 2013 budget calls for $85 million in cuts to the Child Care Assistance Program, which already has some lawmakers thinking in advance on how to handle the program for next year. “We can try to predict caseloads better. … So we can avoid this kind or problem for FY13,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, who chairs the House Human Services Budgeting Committee.
Medicaid plan would shake up the way hospitals are paid
By Jamey Dunn and Ashley Griffin
A draft copy of Medicaid reform legislation closely resembles a proposal that Gov. Pat Quinn made last month. However, it appears that it would reform the way some medical providers are paid and potentially avoid immediate cuts to their rates.
The plan would transition hospitals to a payment plan known as an All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups (APR-DRG) system, according to a draft version of the amendment obtained by Illinois Issues. The legislation covers more than 400 pages.
Quinn’s office did not respond to questions about the draft amendment.
APR-DRGs were created by 3M Health Information Systems for the Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services. “The design and development of the [Diagnosis Related Groups (DRGs)] began in the late '60s at Yale University,” said an overview of DRGs from 3M. “The initial motivation for developing the DRGs was to create an effective framework for monitoring the quality of care and the utilization of services in a hospital setting. The first large-scale application of the DRGs was in the late '70s in the state of New Jersey. The New Jersey State Department of Health used DRGs as the basis of a prospective payment system in which hospitals were reimbursed a fixed DRG specific amount for each patient treated.” The system takes into consideration the complexity of the health issues facing patients that hospitals are treating.
Starting in October 2012,The Department of Health and Family Services would determine the reimbursement rates for inpatient services at hospitals under the APR-DRG payment plan, but Hospitals would still get paid current rates. DHFS would work with the Illinois Hospital Association and a "hospital technical advisory group" on a path to transitioning to the APR-DRG rates by the end of Fiscal Year 2014.
Danny Chun, vice president of corporate communications and marketing for the Illinois Hospital Association, would not comment on specifics of the amendment but said rate cuts to medical providers should be a “last resort.” “There are other options and alternatives that we have been talking to everybody about over the past weeks and months that we think can generate substantial savings and revenues,” Chun said.
Quinn’s original plan would have cut provider reimbursement rates by $675 million. Quinn also proposed a $1-a-pack cigarette tax increase to protect the program and providers from deeper cuts. Such a tax increase would likely be moved in separate legislation.
The draft amendment calls for savings in areas that Quinn outlined in his original proposal. Under the plan:
Sen. Dale Righter, a member of a legislative working group charged with finding Medicaid savings, said he had not seen the amendment. He said he expects Quinn to file his plan by the end of the week. Righter said the rates paid to Medicaid providers have been a pivotal part of negotiations. “I know there is still a lot of talk going on about [provider reimbursements], and I think we’re going to learn a lot more in the next couple of days,” he said.
That's not to say, however, that provider rate cuts would not be a part of the final legislation. Another possibility being considered would spare so-called safety net hospitals — which take a high rate of Medicaid patients and are often in underserved communities — from rate cuts while other hospitals would have to bite the bullet on reductions. Those close to negotiations say the overall plan is still a work in progress and that Quinn’s final proposal would likely see changes from the amendment that is currently circulating.
Righter, a Republican from Mattoon, said it is unlikely that the working group will present competing legislation. “I don’t think it will shake out that way. There will be competing ideas out there, but I don’t think you’re going to see a governor’s bill and a working group’s bill, I don’t think it will break out like that.”
A draft copy of Medicaid reform legislation closely resembles a proposal that Gov. Pat Quinn made last month. However, it appears that it would reform the way some medical providers are paid and potentially avoid immediate cuts to their rates.
The plan would transition hospitals to a payment plan known as an All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups (APR-DRG) system, according to a draft version of the amendment obtained by Illinois Issues. The legislation covers more than 400 pages.
Quinn’s office did not respond to questions about the draft amendment.
APR-DRGs were created by 3M Health Information Systems for the Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services. “The design and development of the [Diagnosis Related Groups (DRGs)] began in the late '60s at Yale University,” said an overview of DRGs from 3M. “The initial motivation for developing the DRGs was to create an effective framework for monitoring the quality of care and the utilization of services in a hospital setting. The first large-scale application of the DRGs was in the late '70s in the state of New Jersey. The New Jersey State Department of Health used DRGs as the basis of a prospective payment system in which hospitals were reimbursed a fixed DRG specific amount for each patient treated.” The system takes into consideration the complexity of the health issues facing patients that hospitals are treating.
Starting in October 2012,The Department of Health and Family Services would determine the reimbursement rates for inpatient services at hospitals under the APR-DRG payment plan, but Hospitals would still get paid current rates. DHFS would work with the Illinois Hospital Association and a "hospital technical advisory group" on a path to transitioning to the APR-DRG rates by the end of Fiscal Year 2014.
Danny Chun, vice president of corporate communications and marketing for the Illinois Hospital Association, would not comment on specifics of the amendment but said rate cuts to medical providers should be a “last resort.” “There are other options and alternatives that we have been talking to everybody about over the past weeks and months that we think can generate substantial savings and revenues,” Chun said.
Quinn’s original plan would have cut provider reimbursement rates by $675 million. Quinn also proposed a $1-a-pack cigarette tax increase to protect the program and providers from deeper cuts. Such a tax increase would likely be moved in separate legislation.
The draft amendment calls for savings in areas that Quinn outlined in his original proposal. Under the plan:
- The Department of Healthcare and Family Services would not longer be required to provide adult dental care or eyeglasses. This does not mean that it would necessarily eliminate eyeglasses. It could also offer to scale back the program by offering replacements less often.
- Illinois Cares RX, a program that provides prescription drug health to seniors, would be eliminated.
- All patients would be limited to four prescriptions a month. Three of them could be brand name drugs. Patients would pay a $2 copay for generic drugs. They currently have no copay for generics.
- Coverage for group therapy in nursing homes, adult chiropractic care and in patient detox programs would be eliminated.
- Repairs to or replacement of medical equipment, such as wheelchairs and prosthetic devices, would require prior approval from DHFS.
Sen. Dale Righter, a member of a legislative working group charged with finding Medicaid savings, said he had not seen the amendment. He said he expects Quinn to file his plan by the end of the week. Righter said the rates paid to Medicaid providers have been a pivotal part of negotiations. “I know there is still a lot of talk going on about [provider reimbursements], and I think we’re going to learn a lot more in the next couple of days,” he said.
That's not to say, however, that provider rate cuts would not be a part of the final legislation. Another possibility being considered would spare so-called safety net hospitals — which take a high rate of Medicaid patients and are often in underserved communities — from rate cuts while other hospitals would have to bite the bullet on reductions. Those close to negotiations say the overall plan is still a work in progress and that Quinn’s final proposal would likely see changes from the amendment that is currently circulating.
Righter, a Republican from Mattoon, said it is unlikely that the working group will present competing legislation. “I don’t think it will shake out that way. There will be competing ideas out there, but I don’t think you’re going to see a governor’s bill and a working group’s bill, I don’t think it will break out like that.”
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
House to take up new spending for child-care providers
By Ashley Griffin
Child-care providers worried that they may stop getting payments from the state may be able to breathe a little easier soon.
Relief in the form of a supplemental appropriations bill could be on the way after Gov. Pat Quinn’s administration sent out letters last week to notify parents and child-care providers that funding for state funded day care centers had fallen short. Providers were told payments would be delayed until July 1. Money for the program comes from the same fund as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), which has seen an 80 percent increase in enrollees since 2009.
According to Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, a Democrat from Chicago, Senate Bill 2450 would restore $73.6 million to pay providers to the end of the Fiscal Year 2012. The subsidies are used to cover child care for low-income families. The bill also calls for $151 million to pay down FY12 Medicaid bills. The money would come from unspent federal funds. “These are jobs, these are mostly single parents who really need to get to get to the workplace, and they need consistent, stable child care, and its our obligation to provide it to them. We under-appropriated last year to them, so this is an emergency supplemental, and we need to push it through so women can get to work and their children [can] have child care services,” said Feigenholtz, who expects the bill to pass Wednesday in the House. A delay in payments would affect up to 40,000 child-care providers and 85,000 low-income families. Feigenholtz said she and other lawmakers have been flooded with calls from providers and parents.
Service Employees International Union (SEIU) held a rally in the state Capitol on Tuesday to protest against the delay in payment to child-care providers, as well as budget cuts to human services programs. Many of the protesters said they believed that corporations should pay more in taxes so that human services and other areas of state government do not have to suffer cuts. “We are taking a stand against these budget cuts, at the same time they are cutting our budget. They are letting these greedy corporations get away with murder,” said Keith Kelleher, SEIU Healthcare Illinois president. “It ain’t right, it ain’t so, and it’s gonna change. Let's just remember who created this budget mess. It wasn’t seniors or people with disabilities, it wasn’t our public employees, it wasn’t our public servants, it wasn’t seniors who went on home care, it wasn’t low-income parents who rely on child care to get to work, it wasn’t the residents of low-income neighborhoods who depend on our services. It was the greedy corporations and the rich executives.”
Faith Arnold, a Bellwood-based family child care provider, said that if the state delays payments, she cannot get a line of credit to cover the costs for those families unable to pay on their own. “When a family is put in a situation that they don’t have care for their children, where do the children go? What happens to that child? Are children roaming the streets? It’s not just about my service, but it’s about what happens in our community. Who is going to be that child’s keeper?”
Although the possibility of additional funds may be on the way for this fiscal year, under the FY 13 budget, Gov. Pat Quinn has proposed $85 million in cuts to the Child Care Assistance Program. The reduction could set up another shortfall next year. An inquiry to Quinn’s budget office was not returned. However, the Department of Human Services supports SB2450.
“It's what’s right and what’s wrong. You cannot solve the budget cuts by putting people out of work, but if the governor gets his $85 million in cuts, 165,000 children will not have child care, and 85,000 parents will not have child care. That’s wrong,” Kelleher said. Feigenholtz said lawmakers are working to see that the program is properly funded next fiscal year, but at the same time, the need for budget cuts is a reality. “We are trying to fix it, but again, we’re going to do the best we can. But we are doing the best we can to make this a top priority,” she said.
Child-care providers worried that they may stop getting payments from the state may be able to breathe a little easier soon.
Relief in the form of a supplemental appropriations bill could be on the way after Gov. Pat Quinn’s administration sent out letters last week to notify parents and child-care providers that funding for state funded day care centers had fallen short. Providers were told payments would be delayed until July 1. Money for the program comes from the same fund as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), which has seen an 80 percent increase in enrollees since 2009.
According to Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, a Democrat from Chicago, Senate Bill 2450 would restore $73.6 million to pay providers to the end of the Fiscal Year 2012. The subsidies are used to cover child care for low-income families. The bill also calls for $151 million to pay down FY12 Medicaid bills. The money would come from unspent federal funds. “These are jobs, these are mostly single parents who really need to get to get to the workplace, and they need consistent, stable child care, and its our obligation to provide it to them. We under-appropriated last year to them, so this is an emergency supplemental, and we need to push it through so women can get to work and their children [can] have child care services,” said Feigenholtz, who expects the bill to pass Wednesday in the House. A delay in payments would affect up to 40,000 child-care providers and 85,000 low-income families. Feigenholtz said she and other lawmakers have been flooded with calls from providers and parents.
Service Employees International Union (SEIU) held a rally in the state Capitol on Tuesday to protest against the delay in payment to child-care providers, as well as budget cuts to human services programs. Many of the protesters said they believed that corporations should pay more in taxes so that human services and other areas of state government do not have to suffer cuts. “We are taking a stand against these budget cuts, at the same time they are cutting our budget. They are letting these greedy corporations get away with murder,” said Keith Kelleher, SEIU Healthcare Illinois president. “It ain’t right, it ain’t so, and it’s gonna change. Let's just remember who created this budget mess. It wasn’t seniors or people with disabilities, it wasn’t our public employees, it wasn’t our public servants, it wasn’t seniors who went on home care, it wasn’t low-income parents who rely on child care to get to work, it wasn’t the residents of low-income neighborhoods who depend on our services. It was the greedy corporations and the rich executives.”
Faith Arnold, a Bellwood-based family child care provider, said that if the state delays payments, she cannot get a line of credit to cover the costs for those families unable to pay on their own. “When a family is put in a situation that they don’t have care for their children, where do the children go? What happens to that child? Are children roaming the streets? It’s not just about my service, but it’s about what happens in our community. Who is going to be that child’s keeper?”
Although the possibility of additional funds may be on the way for this fiscal year, under the FY 13 budget, Gov. Pat Quinn has proposed $85 million in cuts to the Child Care Assistance Program. The reduction could set up another shortfall next year. An inquiry to Quinn’s budget office was not returned. However, the Department of Human Services supports SB2450.
“It's what’s right and what’s wrong. You cannot solve the budget cuts by putting people out of work, but if the governor gets his $85 million in cuts, 165,000 children will not have child care, and 85,000 parents will not have child care. That’s wrong,” Kelleher said. Feigenholtz said lawmakers are working to see that the program is properly funded next fiscal year, but at the same time, the need for budget cuts is a reality. “We are trying to fix it, but again, we’re going to do the best we can. But we are doing the best we can to make this a top priority,” she said.
Friday, May 11, 2012
Legislators look into state hiring practice
By Ashley Griffin
A group of lawmakers is looking into state agencies’ polices on hiring people with criminal backgrounds, and some advocates would like to see more clarity in the hiring practice.
A task force created in 2009 is trying to assess how criminal records come into play when the state is filling jobs. The group is working to compile a report with details, such as the number and percentage of individuals who underwent a background check, the number of individuals who were disqualified based on a criminal background and other details for hiring practices for state agencies. “What we hope to see is to give people with criminal records a lay of the land or what’s on the playing field. If I am applying for the comptroller’s office, what positions are restrictive? And if I have a criminal record, I know I can’t apply for this position,” said Anthony Lowery, director of policy and advocacy for the Safer Foundation, a group that seeks to reduce the recidivism rates of ex-convicts by helping them find jobs. Groups targeting poverty and recidivism have called upon the state to set an example by loosening its policies on hiring individuals with criminal backgrounds for some positions. They hope that such a change would encourage the private sector to follow suit.
But since the creation of the task force nearly three years ago, some advocates believe that it is still hard for convicted criminals to find employment with a state agency They say it is unclear which positions might be restricted and what information the state is using to disqualify applicants.
“The big part of it is also you have people who have arrest records that have never been convicted and arrest records also are being used to discriminate, so what we are trying to do is get state government to step up and just do an inventory of the job titles.”
According to Lowery, nearly one-third of the Illinois’ population has some type of criminal record, including arrests.
Rep. Constance Howard, who is chairwoman of the task force, said she is unhappy with how slowly the work has been going. Howard said the group is having trouble getting information from various agencies. “Apparently, there has been no regard for the deadlines, I have been trying to catch up with this, and again, I have not been very pleased with the way it is going,” she said.
The group is scheduled to present a report to Gov. Pat Quinn in September.
A group of lawmakers is looking into state agencies’ polices on hiring people with criminal backgrounds, and some advocates would like to see more clarity in the hiring practice.
A task force created in 2009 is trying to assess how criminal records come into play when the state is filling jobs. The group is working to compile a report with details, such as the number and percentage of individuals who underwent a background check, the number of individuals who were disqualified based on a criminal background and other details for hiring practices for state agencies. “What we hope to see is to give people with criminal records a lay of the land or what’s on the playing field. If I am applying for the comptroller’s office, what positions are restrictive? And if I have a criminal record, I know I can’t apply for this position,” said Anthony Lowery, director of policy and advocacy for the Safer Foundation, a group that seeks to reduce the recidivism rates of ex-convicts by helping them find jobs. Groups targeting poverty and recidivism have called upon the state to set an example by loosening its policies on hiring individuals with criminal backgrounds for some positions. They hope that such a change would encourage the private sector to follow suit.
But since the creation of the task force nearly three years ago, some advocates believe that it is still hard for convicted criminals to find employment with a state agency They say it is unclear which positions might be restricted and what information the state is using to disqualify applicants.
“The big part of it is also you have people who have arrest records that have never been convicted and arrest records also are being used to discriminate, so what we are trying to do is get state government to step up and just do an inventory of the job titles.”
According to Lowery, nearly one-third of the Illinois’ population has some type of criminal record, including arrests.
Rep. Constance Howard, who is chairwoman of the task force, said she is unhappy with how slowly the work has been going. Howard said the group is having trouble getting information from various agencies. “Apparently, there has been no regard for the deadlines, I have been trying to catch up with this, and again, I have not been very pleased with the way it is going,” she said.
The group is scheduled to present a report to Gov. Pat Quinn in September.
Quinn says he'll sign cut to retiree health care support
By Jamey Dunn
Gov. Pat Quinn said he plans to sign legislation that would make many state retirees pay more for their health care.
Currently, most retired state workers do not pay premiums for their health care, and supporters of Senate Bill 1313, which passed in the Senate Thursday, say it is a benefit that the state can no longer afford. “If we don’t act now, current retires and those who will be retiring in the future will be unquestionably faced with higher health payments and a severe reduction of benefits. Our current approach to this issue is simply unaffordable and unsustainable,” said Sen. Jeffrey Schoenberg, an Evanston Democrat. The measure passed in the House on Wednesday.
Retirees earn those benefits based on years spent on the job. But under SB1313, the Department of Central Management Systems would instead set the amount that the state proposes to pay, and the rest of the cost would be made up by retirees through premiums. The state is expected to pay more than $800 million for the benefits this fiscal year. Quinn said the premiums would be means tested and determined by a number of factors, including how much each retiree receives in pension benefits and how long he or she worked for the state. Once retirees become eligible for Medicare, their premiums would decrease.
Quinn said in a written statement that he would sign the bill, but he did not say when. If he signs it soon, the measure would go into effect July 1. “I am encouraged that legislators have taken this step towards restoring fiscal stability to Illinois. This legislation will help ensure that our retirees continue to have access to quality health care, while also lowering the cost to taxpayers,” he said.
According to Schoenberg, CMS would still bargain with the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees over retiree health care benefits. The deal reached would apply to all state and university employees. Schoenberg said that AFSCME would handle the negotiations because the union represents the largest portion of workers. Supporters say this measure would simply allow CMS to bring a number to the table that reflects the state’s budget reality. The legislature's Joint Committee on Administrative Rules also has to sign off on the number.
“It will be a collectively bargained retiree benefit,” said Robb Craddick, who is deputy director of labor relations for CMS and the chief labor negotiator for the state. “The intent of this legislation is to allow the Department of Central Management Services to negotiate a means-based plan.” Craddick said that if JCAR rejects the number, then AFSCME and CMS would return to the table. “I support and respect the collective bargaining process. … These benefits are going to be collectively bargained. So I certainly hope that in the public discussion, there’s no representation that it’s going to be anything but that,” Schoenberg said.
But union officials say the plan impedes the collective bargaining process and allows CMS to arbitrarily set the amount the state would pay. John Cameron, director of political and community relations for AFSCME, said state retirees already pay some health care costs through copays and deductible. He said that the average employee receiving basic health care services, which excludes treatment for chronic illness, pays about $3,000 a year.
Cameron argued that while working, retirees gave up other things through collective bargaining, such as raises, as a trade off for their paid health care. “The health insurance is a benefit that was earned. It’s not a perk, it’s not a privilege, it's not a giveaway,” he said. “While working members, they negotiated to make sure that their retiree health care benefits were affordable. And as a consequence, they took less in salary, less in wage increases. That reduced their pension, so they have less [retirement] income. But again, they were operating under this framework that they were guaranteed affordable health benefits.” He said that the new plan does not give retirees a way to predict what their health care costs would be from year to year.
Cameron said the rising cost of health care is a serious issue, but he said the proposal does nothing to address that problem. “Let’s be clear: What we’re doing here is both breaking a promise to those retirees and shifting the cost of that health care liability onto their shoulders. We’re not reducing it. We’re not eliminating it. It remains unaffordable, but we have decided to stick the bill to those who can least afford it.”
Gov. Pat Quinn said he plans to sign legislation that would make many state retirees pay more for their health care.
Currently, most retired state workers do not pay premiums for their health care, and supporters of Senate Bill 1313, which passed in the Senate Thursday, say it is a benefit that the state can no longer afford. “If we don’t act now, current retires and those who will be retiring in the future will be unquestionably faced with higher health payments and a severe reduction of benefits. Our current approach to this issue is simply unaffordable and unsustainable,” said Sen. Jeffrey Schoenberg, an Evanston Democrat. The measure passed in the House on Wednesday.
Retirees earn those benefits based on years spent on the job. But under SB1313, the Department of Central Management Systems would instead set the amount that the state proposes to pay, and the rest of the cost would be made up by retirees through premiums. The state is expected to pay more than $800 million for the benefits this fiscal year. Quinn said the premiums would be means tested and determined by a number of factors, including how much each retiree receives in pension benefits and how long he or she worked for the state. Once retirees become eligible for Medicare, their premiums would decrease.
Quinn said in a written statement that he would sign the bill, but he did not say when. If he signs it soon, the measure would go into effect July 1. “I am encouraged that legislators have taken this step towards restoring fiscal stability to Illinois. This legislation will help ensure that our retirees continue to have access to quality health care, while also lowering the cost to taxpayers,” he said.
According to Schoenberg, CMS would still bargain with the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees over retiree health care benefits. The deal reached would apply to all state and university employees. Schoenberg said that AFSCME would handle the negotiations because the union represents the largest portion of workers. Supporters say this measure would simply allow CMS to bring a number to the table that reflects the state’s budget reality. The legislature's Joint Committee on Administrative Rules also has to sign off on the number.
“It will be a collectively bargained retiree benefit,” said Robb Craddick, who is deputy director of labor relations for CMS and the chief labor negotiator for the state. “The intent of this legislation is to allow the Department of Central Management Services to negotiate a means-based plan.” Craddick said that if JCAR rejects the number, then AFSCME and CMS would return to the table. “I support and respect the collective bargaining process. … These benefits are going to be collectively bargained. So I certainly hope that in the public discussion, there’s no representation that it’s going to be anything but that,” Schoenberg said.
But union officials say the plan impedes the collective bargaining process and allows CMS to arbitrarily set the amount the state would pay. John Cameron, director of political and community relations for AFSCME, said state retirees already pay some health care costs through copays and deductible. He said that the average employee receiving basic health care services, which excludes treatment for chronic illness, pays about $3,000 a year.
Cameron argued that while working, retirees gave up other things through collective bargaining, such as raises, as a trade off for their paid health care. “The health insurance is a benefit that was earned. It’s not a perk, it’s not a privilege, it's not a giveaway,” he said. “While working members, they negotiated to make sure that their retiree health care benefits were affordable. And as a consequence, they took less in salary, less in wage increases. That reduced their pension, so they have less [retirement] income. But again, they were operating under this framework that they were guaranteed affordable health benefits.” He said that the new plan does not give retirees a way to predict what their health care costs would be from year to year.
Cameron said the rising cost of health care is a serious issue, but he said the proposal does nothing to address that problem. “Let’s be clear: What we’re doing here is both breaking a promise to those retirees and shifting the cost of that health care liability onto their shoulders. We’re not reducing it. We’re not eliminating it. It remains unaffordable, but we have decided to stick the bill to those who can least afford it.”
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Rep. Smith shows up but says little
By Jamey Dunn
Rep. Derrick Smith and his lawyer appeared before a House investigative committee today, but the two did little to shed light on the allegations of bribery against Smith.
Smith faces one charge of bribery from allegedly accepting $7,000 from a day care center, which he believed was seeking a state construction grant. In reality, the center was not seeking a grant, and Smith was the subject of a federal sting. Smith read a prepared statement to the committee, which is tasked with deciding whether there is enough evidence to discipline him. He refused to testify under oath or to answer questions. His lawyer, Victor Henderson, took questions from the committee but declined to answer many of them.
Smith said he is “painfully aware” how his arrest reflects on him and the House. However, he maintained his innocence. “I intend to fight this charge and clear my name,” Smith said. “I will continue to represent the interest of the people in [my] district. They elected me despite the fact that the government had leveled a charge against me just a week before the primary. In the same way that the people in the district did not abandon me, I will not abandon them.” Smith was appointed to his House seat. In March, he won the Democratic primary race in his district with 77 percent of the vote.
Henderson said that Smith may opt to testify before the committee in the future but does not want to do so until federal prosecutors grant the defense access to the evidence against Smith.
Committee members and House Counsel David Ellis, questioned Henderson about specific parts of the criminal compliant. Ellis read the portion of the complaint that describes Smith and the government source counting out the $7,000 that prosecutors say was a bribe. When directly asked, Henderson would say if Smith wrote the letter of support or took the $7,000. Henderson said that he would not comment “without full knowledge” of the information in the case. He said the only people who can provide this information are prosecutors. Henderson said that since federal investigators created a fake nonprofit and other documents as part of their sting, it is difficult to sort out what is real. “By the government’s own admission, they created documents — false documents. So without having access to the discovery [of evidence], who created what? I can’t tell you. All I can tell you is that they acknowledged creating false documents, fake email accounts, fake letters and things of that nature.”
Ellis said the committee was giving Smith the opportunity to present his side of the story. “This is not an adversarial proceeding, believe it or not. This is supposed to be a truth finding function. I am doing what no cross examiner would do, I’m giving you the floor to explain. … I’m trying to figure out, did he write this letter. It’s not a crime to write a letter. That’s just part of the story,” Ellis said.
He tried to push Henderson to deny or explain any aspects of the criminal complaint against Smith, but Henderson continued to stonewall and attempt to cast doubt on prosecutors' case. “The government lawyers put their pants on one leg at time just like the rest of us do. They’re susceptible to being dishonest. They’re susceptible to making mistakes. They’re susceptible sometimes to, you know, not doing the right thing.” Henderson focused on the government’s anonymous witness — who, according to the criminal complaint, brokered the deal between Smith and the day care. Henderson said the informant had been on the “government payroll” long before he met Smith and pointed out that he had criminal convictions and multiple arrests on his record. Henderson said any disciplinary action against Smith before the completion of his criminal case would be “premature.” “Lots of people are charged every day of violating laws, and those charges turn out often times to be unfounded,” he said.
However, Rep. Dennis Reboletti, an Elmhurst Republican, said he thinks the committee probably has enough evidence to move forward and recommend some disciplinary action based on the criminal complaint against Smith. He said that lawmakers had to make a “judgment call” when they impeached former Gov. Rod Blagojevich and removed him from office before his criminal case had been resolved, and he sees parallels between that situation and the current one. “I’m not sure how many [more] times this committee is going to meet before we begin our deliberations,” he said to Henderson and Smith.
Rep. Elaine Nekritz, the chair of the investigative committee, said the committee can consider Smith’s decision not to go under oath or take questions when deciding whether to recommend disciplinary action to the full House. She said the committee will regroup and decide the next step. “I think we all need a little bit of time to reflect on this and think about what we’ve heard to day,” said Nekritz, a Northbrook Democrat.
As the committee weighs its options and the criminal case against Smith proceeds, he continues in his position as a legislator. Henderson said Smith has been going to work each day at his legislative office and attending session days in Springfield and that his constituents should be proud. “Everybody, whether you’re a dentist or a news reporter or a lawyer, you’re going to have good days and bad days. And the test of a man is when he has his back up against a wall and shows us. Jesus, Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, they all had bad days, and they all persevered,” Henderson told reporters after today’s hearing: “You don’t really understand what a man is made of until he’s tested. And I think that there are a whole lot of people who admire him to be able to stand up like he has as opposed to caving. That speaks to his character.”
Rep. Derrick Smith and his lawyer appeared before a House investigative committee today, but the two did little to shed light on the allegations of bribery against Smith.
Smith faces one charge of bribery from allegedly accepting $7,000 from a day care center, which he believed was seeking a state construction grant. In reality, the center was not seeking a grant, and Smith was the subject of a federal sting. Smith read a prepared statement to the committee, which is tasked with deciding whether there is enough evidence to discipline him. He refused to testify under oath or to answer questions. His lawyer, Victor Henderson, took questions from the committee but declined to answer many of them.
Smith said he is “painfully aware” how his arrest reflects on him and the House. However, he maintained his innocence. “I intend to fight this charge and clear my name,” Smith said. “I will continue to represent the interest of the people in [my] district. They elected me despite the fact that the government had leveled a charge against me just a week before the primary. In the same way that the people in the district did not abandon me, I will not abandon them.” Smith was appointed to his House seat. In March, he won the Democratic primary race in his district with 77 percent of the vote.
Henderson said that Smith may opt to testify before the committee in the future but does not want to do so until federal prosecutors grant the defense access to the evidence against Smith.
Committee members and House Counsel David Ellis, questioned Henderson about specific parts of the criminal compliant. Ellis read the portion of the complaint that describes Smith and the government source counting out the $7,000 that prosecutors say was a bribe. When directly asked, Henderson would say if Smith wrote the letter of support or took the $7,000. Henderson said that he would not comment “without full knowledge” of the information in the case. He said the only people who can provide this information are prosecutors. Henderson said that since federal investigators created a fake nonprofit and other documents as part of their sting, it is difficult to sort out what is real. “By the government’s own admission, they created documents — false documents. So without having access to the discovery [of evidence], who created what? I can’t tell you. All I can tell you is that they acknowledged creating false documents, fake email accounts, fake letters and things of that nature.”
Ellis said the committee was giving Smith the opportunity to present his side of the story. “This is not an adversarial proceeding, believe it or not. This is supposed to be a truth finding function. I am doing what no cross examiner would do, I’m giving you the floor to explain. … I’m trying to figure out, did he write this letter. It’s not a crime to write a letter. That’s just part of the story,” Ellis said.
He tried to push Henderson to deny or explain any aspects of the criminal complaint against Smith, but Henderson continued to stonewall and attempt to cast doubt on prosecutors' case. “The government lawyers put their pants on one leg at time just like the rest of us do. They’re susceptible to being dishonest. They’re susceptible to making mistakes. They’re susceptible sometimes to, you know, not doing the right thing.” Henderson focused on the government’s anonymous witness — who, according to the criminal complaint, brokered the deal between Smith and the day care. Henderson said the informant had been on the “government payroll” long before he met Smith and pointed out that he had criminal convictions and multiple arrests on his record. Henderson said any disciplinary action against Smith before the completion of his criminal case would be “premature.” “Lots of people are charged every day of violating laws, and those charges turn out often times to be unfounded,” he said.
However, Rep. Dennis Reboletti, an Elmhurst Republican, said he thinks the committee probably has enough evidence to move forward and recommend some disciplinary action based on the criminal complaint against Smith. He said that lawmakers had to make a “judgment call” when they impeached former Gov. Rod Blagojevich and removed him from office before his criminal case had been resolved, and he sees parallels between that situation and the current one. “I’m not sure how many [more] times this committee is going to meet before we begin our deliberations,” he said to Henderson and Smith.
Rep. Elaine Nekritz, the chair of the investigative committee, said the committee can consider Smith’s decision not to go under oath or take questions when deciding whether to recommend disciplinary action to the full House. She said the committee will regroup and decide the next step. “I think we all need a little bit of time to reflect on this and think about what we’ve heard to day,” said Nekritz, a Northbrook Democrat.
As the committee weighs its options and the criminal case against Smith proceeds, he continues in his position as a legislator. Henderson said Smith has been going to work each day at his legislative office and attending session days in Springfield and that his constituents should be proud. “Everybody, whether you’re a dentist or a news reporter or a lawyer, you’re going to have good days and bad days. And the test of a man is when he has his back up against a wall and shows us. Jesus, Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, they all had bad days, and they all persevered,” Henderson told reporters after today’s hearing: “You don’t really understand what a man is made of until he’s tested. And I think that there are a whole lot of people who admire him to be able to stand up like he has as opposed to caving. That speaks to his character.”
Wednesday, May 09, 2012
House votes to scale back public retiree health benefits
By Jamey Dunn
Retired public workers in Illinois may have to shell out more for their health care.
The House today approved Senate Bill 1313. The measure allows Central Management Systems (CMS) to set the amount that the state would pay for retiree health care benefits. The rest of the cost would be covered by retirees through premiums. Currently, many employees do not pay a premium for health care after they retire. This year, the state expects to pay more than $800 million for retiree health care
“Not only are these benefits unaffordable, given today’s fiscal situation, but they are far more generous than those provided by other governments to their employees and those provided by the private sector,” said House Speaker Michael Madigan, a sponsor of the bill.
After CMS, an agency under the governor, sets the amount the state would contribute, the legislature's Joint Committee on Administrative Rules would have the option to reject the number from CMS. Gov. Pat Quinn intends to decide premiums based on a sliding scale. “The scale is based on (1) length of service, and (2) ability to pay," said a memo from CMS that was entered into the record with SB 1313. "The percent of cost the retiree will pay will also be based on his or her pension level. Pension amounts will be broken up into seven tiers; the higher the tier, the more the retiree will pay,” According to the memo, retirees on Medicare would pay “substantially less” than those not eligible for Medicare.
Union officials say that while many retirees do not pay premiums for themselves, they do pay copays and deductibles, along with premiums for family members who are covered on their plans. The American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees Council 31 estimates that retirees with average health care needs, meaning no chronic illness or long term hospital stays, pay an average of $3,000 per year for health care.
Opponents said that the state would be increasing costs to retirees on fixed incomes without properly exploring all options of giving them enough chance to have their voices heard. “They all were under the assumption that this was a benefit that they could rely upon, and they feel that the state has sold them out,” said Rep. Robert Pritchard, a Hinckley Republican.
However, Madigan said he viewed the issue more as a budgeting move than a labor relations concern. “Although there are differing opinions in the area of pensions, there really is no disagreement in the area of health care. The health care is not contractually or constitutionally guaranteed. It can be changed or eliminated,” Madigan said.
Henry Bayer, executive director of AFSCME Council 31, said that he is worried about the future of retiree health care being determined by the Quinn administration. “They have put the fate of tens of thousands of retired public servants in the hands of the governor,’ Bayer said. “We’re seen how this administration has botched so many things.” Bayer said that most retired state employees have relatively modest pensions, and increased health care costs, coupled with potential reductions in pension benefits, would make it harder for retirees to make ends meet. “This would just make it more difficult for people who retire from the state of Illinois or from a public university to have a livable income in retirement. [Some lawmakers] want to cut their [pension] income and ask them to pay more for their health insurance,” he said. “That’s a bad deal all around and not something you would expect Democrats to be doing.”
But House Republican Leader Tom Cross said that both pension and retiree health care benefits must be scaled back to save both systems from collapse. “We fall into this trap of believing that that can’t happen in this country,” Cross said.
Retired public workers in Illinois may have to shell out more for their health care.
The House today approved Senate Bill 1313. The measure allows Central Management Systems (CMS) to set the amount that the state would pay for retiree health care benefits. The rest of the cost would be covered by retirees through premiums. Currently, many employees do not pay a premium for health care after they retire. This year, the state expects to pay more than $800 million for retiree health care
“Not only are these benefits unaffordable, given today’s fiscal situation, but they are far more generous than those provided by other governments to their employees and those provided by the private sector,” said House Speaker Michael Madigan, a sponsor of the bill.
After CMS, an agency under the governor, sets the amount the state would contribute, the legislature's Joint Committee on Administrative Rules would have the option to reject the number from CMS. Gov. Pat Quinn intends to decide premiums based on a sliding scale. “The scale is based on (1) length of service, and (2) ability to pay," said a memo from CMS that was entered into the record with SB 1313. "The percent of cost the retiree will pay will also be based on his or her pension level. Pension amounts will be broken up into seven tiers; the higher the tier, the more the retiree will pay,” According to the memo, retirees on Medicare would pay “substantially less” than those not eligible for Medicare.
Union officials say that while many retirees do not pay premiums for themselves, they do pay copays and deductibles, along with premiums for family members who are covered on their plans. The American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees Council 31 estimates that retirees with average health care needs, meaning no chronic illness or long term hospital stays, pay an average of $3,000 per year for health care.
Opponents said that the state would be increasing costs to retirees on fixed incomes without properly exploring all options of giving them enough chance to have their voices heard. “They all were under the assumption that this was a benefit that they could rely upon, and they feel that the state has sold them out,” said Rep. Robert Pritchard, a Hinckley Republican.
However, Madigan said he viewed the issue more as a budgeting move than a labor relations concern. “Although there are differing opinions in the area of pensions, there really is no disagreement in the area of health care. The health care is not contractually or constitutionally guaranteed. It can be changed or eliminated,” Madigan said.
Henry Bayer, executive director of AFSCME Council 31, said that he is worried about the future of retiree health care being determined by the Quinn administration. “They have put the fate of tens of thousands of retired public servants in the hands of the governor,’ Bayer said. “We’re seen how this administration has botched so many things.” Bayer said that most retired state employees have relatively modest pensions, and increased health care costs, coupled with potential reductions in pension benefits, would make it harder for retirees to make ends meet. “This would just make it more difficult for people who retire from the state of Illinois or from a public university to have a livable income in retirement. [Some lawmakers] want to cut their [pension] income and ask them to pay more for their health insurance,” he said. “That’s a bad deal all around and not something you would expect Democrats to be doing.”
But House Republican Leader Tom Cross said that both pension and retiree health care benefits must be scaled back to save both systems from collapse. “We fall into this trap of believing that that can’t happen in this country,” Cross said.
Audit finds more problems with college savings plan
By Jamey Dunn
A state audit released today shows that problems with a state prepaid tuition program went deeper than initially thought.
After College Illinois! came under scrutiny last year, lawmakers asked Auditor General William Holland to take a comprehensive look at the program. A previous audit showed that the Illinois Student Assistance Commission, which administers College Illinois!, had not followed procurement rules when hiring financial advisers, and bending the rules may have led to $12.78 million in lost investments.
Today’s audit delved even deeper into the commission's questionable procurement practices. The probe found that former employees directly involved in choosing investment firms had personal investments tied up with the firms during the procurement process and failed to report the conflicts of interest. The commission also did not have documentation from the procurement process. Items that were missing included vendor interviews and presentations as well as evaluations of vendors. In some cases, ISAC changed the criteria for vendors after beginning the procurement process.
Auditors also found that ISAC had used misleading advertisements that could make investors think that the program was backed by the faith and credit of the state. It is not. If ISAC were to run out of money, lawmakers could vote to bail it out, but there is no guarantee that this would happen. As of February, the program was underfunded by 30 percent. Administrators say it is not in immediate danger of becoming insolvent, but without changes, College Illinois! could have trouble making payments by 2020.
“The fast and loose operations of ISAC prior to last summer are more pervasive than we thought,” said Rep. Jim Durkin, a Western Springs Republican. However, Durkin said there were no real surprises in the audit. “What we’re reading about is history. It’s in the past, and I hope it will stay as part of the past.” Since the problems with the program were made public, Gov. Pat Quinn replaced leadership at ISAC. The program put a freeze on selling new contracts and has brought in an outside consultant to help address some of the problems. “The report does not cover the time from July 2011 to the present, during which Governor Quinn and the new commission board have taken decisive action to enhance business practices,” said a written statement from ISAC.
The commission pointed to steps taken to address the issue and says it plans to do more going forward. “It’s important to note that most of the recommendations pertain to policies, practices and procedures undertaken by former agency and program leadership. While we can’t change the past, be assured that the new Illinois Student Assistance Commission board and staff are hard at work implementing the changes necessary to stabilize and mend the program on behalf of current and future contract holders and their beneficiaries,” said a written statement addressed to contract holders and posted on ISAC’s website.
Durkin, who is a College Illinois! contract holder, said he does not expect any legislation related to the program to pass this spring. However, he said that there would be talks over the summer with legislators, ISAC and public universities. “The cost of public education is skyrocketing,” he said. Durkin said the rapidly increasing cost to students is making it difficult to sustain a prepaid tuition program such as College Illinois!.
The audit found that the cost of doing business for the program has spiked as well. “Program costs nearly tripled from $6.4 million in fiscal year 2006 to $18.1 million in fiscal year 2011 due to a substantial increase in investment management fees and increases in both direct and shared payroll expenses. Fees collected from purchasers of tuition contracts covered only 7 percent of operating costs in fiscal year 2011,” said Holland’s report. Durkin said he was “alarmed” at the increased costs of the program. “I think [ISAC] needs to go back and renegotiate the fees and the contracts with these money managers,” he said. “They’re not hitting home runs in the market, but they are being paid quite handsomely out of the fund.”
A state audit released today shows that problems with a state prepaid tuition program went deeper than initially thought.
After College Illinois! came under scrutiny last year, lawmakers asked Auditor General William Holland to take a comprehensive look at the program. A previous audit showed that the Illinois Student Assistance Commission, which administers College Illinois!, had not followed procurement rules when hiring financial advisers, and bending the rules may have led to $12.78 million in lost investments.
Today’s audit delved even deeper into the commission's questionable procurement practices. The probe found that former employees directly involved in choosing investment firms had personal investments tied up with the firms during the procurement process and failed to report the conflicts of interest. The commission also did not have documentation from the procurement process. Items that were missing included vendor interviews and presentations as well as evaluations of vendors. In some cases, ISAC changed the criteria for vendors after beginning the procurement process.
Auditors also found that ISAC had used misleading advertisements that could make investors think that the program was backed by the faith and credit of the state. It is not. If ISAC were to run out of money, lawmakers could vote to bail it out, but there is no guarantee that this would happen. As of February, the program was underfunded by 30 percent. Administrators say it is not in immediate danger of becoming insolvent, but without changes, College Illinois! could have trouble making payments by 2020.
“The fast and loose operations of ISAC prior to last summer are more pervasive than we thought,” said Rep. Jim Durkin, a Western Springs Republican. However, Durkin said there were no real surprises in the audit. “What we’re reading about is history. It’s in the past, and I hope it will stay as part of the past.” Since the problems with the program were made public, Gov. Pat Quinn replaced leadership at ISAC. The program put a freeze on selling new contracts and has brought in an outside consultant to help address some of the problems. “The report does not cover the time from July 2011 to the present, during which Governor Quinn and the new commission board have taken decisive action to enhance business practices,” said a written statement from ISAC.
The commission pointed to steps taken to address the issue and says it plans to do more going forward. “It’s important to note that most of the recommendations pertain to policies, practices and procedures undertaken by former agency and program leadership. While we can’t change the past, be assured that the new Illinois Student Assistance Commission board and staff are hard at work implementing the changes necessary to stabilize and mend the program on behalf of current and future contract holders and their beneficiaries,” said a written statement addressed to contract holders and posted on ISAC’s website.
Durkin, who is a College Illinois! contract holder, said he does not expect any legislation related to the program to pass this spring. However, he said that there would be talks over the summer with legislators, ISAC and public universities. “The cost of public education is skyrocketing,” he said. Durkin said the rapidly increasing cost to students is making it difficult to sustain a prepaid tuition program such as College Illinois!.
The audit found that the cost of doing business for the program has spiked as well. “Program costs nearly tripled from $6.4 million in fiscal year 2006 to $18.1 million in fiscal year 2011 due to a substantial increase in investment management fees and increases in both direct and shared payroll expenses. Fees collected from purchasers of tuition contracts covered only 7 percent of operating costs in fiscal year 2011,” said Holland’s report. Durkin said he was “alarmed” at the increased costs of the program. “I think [ISAC] needs to go back and renegotiate the fees and the contracts with these money managers,” he said. “They’re not hitting home runs in the market, but they are being paid quite handsomely out of the fund.”
Court bars enforcement of eavesdropping bill, but some say legislation is still needed
By Ashley Griffin
The debate over Illinois’ eavesdropping law has taken yet another turn.
This week, a federal appeals court called for an injunction to block Cook County prosecutors from enforcing a provision in the law that bars citizens from making audio recordings of on-duty police officers. The court reportedly called the provision the “broadest of its kind in the country” and said that it “likely” violates First Amendment rights.
Although a court has ruled on the measure, supporters of Senate Bill 1808, which is sponsored by Northbrook Democratic Rep. Elaine Nekritz, say the measure is still needed. “We applaud yesterday’s decision by the 7th Circuit U.S. Courts of Appeals as it applies to Illinois’ eavesdropping law being unconstitutional,” said Josh Sharp, director of government relations for the Illinois Press Association. “I do make to want clear that the legislative option is certainly something that still remains on the table. We had some questions about the applicability of yesterday’s decision and who exactly it will apply to in the state of Illinois.”
Backers of the bill say they are concerned that the court ruling would only apply to Cook County, leaving downstate residents open to prosecution. Recording a police officer without permission is a felony that carries a sentence of up to 15 years. They say legislation is necessary to clarify the ruling. Nekritz’s bill would allow for the recording of on-duty officers in public places. It would also bar the use of doctored or edited recordings in a complaint against an officer. Law enforcement officials oppose an earlier version of the bill, and it was shot down by the House. But Nekritz hopes that the new version, with its provision to address tampering, will gain more support.
The debate over Illinois’ eavesdropping law has taken yet another turn.
This week, a federal appeals court called for an injunction to block Cook County prosecutors from enforcing a provision in the law that bars citizens from making audio recordings of on-duty police officers. The court reportedly called the provision the “broadest of its kind in the country” and said that it “likely” violates First Amendment rights.
Although a court has ruled on the measure, supporters of Senate Bill 1808, which is sponsored by Northbrook Democratic Rep. Elaine Nekritz, say the measure is still needed. “We applaud yesterday’s decision by the 7th Circuit U.S. Courts of Appeals as it applies to Illinois’ eavesdropping law being unconstitutional,” said Josh Sharp, director of government relations for the Illinois Press Association. “I do make to want clear that the legislative option is certainly something that still remains on the table. We had some questions about the applicability of yesterday’s decision and who exactly it will apply to in the state of Illinois.”
Backers of the bill say they are concerned that the court ruling would only apply to Cook County, leaving downstate residents open to prosecution. Recording a police officer without permission is a felony that carries a sentence of up to 15 years. They say legislation is necessary to clarify the ruling. Nekritz’s bill would allow for the recording of on-duty officers in public places. It would also bar the use of doctored or edited recordings in a complaint against an officer. Law enforcement officials oppose an earlier version of the bill, and it was shot down by the House. But Nekritz hopes that the new version, with its provision to address tampering, will gain more support.
Tuesday, May 08, 2012
TANF recipients may be cut off from benefits
By Ashley Griffin
As lawmakers look to cut billions from the state’s Medicaid liability, other programs geared at helping Illinoisans in poverty may also see substantial reductions.
Gov. Pat Quinn’s proposed budget would cap lifetime eligibility for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Family Program, formerly known as welfare, at three years. TANF provides cash assistance to pregnant women or families with children, and lifetime benefits are currently capped at five years. Quinn has also proposed reductions to job training and placement programs offered through the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps. However, Quinn’s plan does not call for cuts to food stamps, which are paid for with federal funds.
In recent years, income assistance programs have all seen increases, and the Department of Human Services says it cannot afford to keep pace. According to Michelle Saddler, secretary of the Illinois Department of Human Services, the proposed cuts are a result of the increased demands in services — a result of the recession that hit Illinois hard. The department has seen a spike in demands on its income assistance programs and programs that assist persons with developmental disabilities and mental disabilities in the wake of the recession. “Some of those increased cost come from increased demand. As we all know, there has been an economic downturn. During an economic downturn more and more people need services,” Saddler said. According to Linda Satterfield, director of the Division of Family and Community Services at DHS, caseloads at local offices have grown 38 percent in the last five years. “Last year, the TANF caseload was 38,500. Our TANF caseload has grown to 46,000. We have the 12th largest TANF caseload in the nation, and our processing time ranks 51st,” said Satterfield.
Increased demand for the TANF program is squeezing out other programs that rely on the same funds. Quinn’s administration has notified child care providers in the state that they may see payments delayed at least until the next fiscal year starts in July because they are paid out of the same fund as TANF benefits. Under federal welfare reform passed in the '90s, states can spend TANF dollars on programs besides cash assistance, such as child care and job training. Quinn is seeking a supplemental appropriation from lawmakers to try to keep TANF assistance and child care subsidies afloat. “We will not be able to get through this fiscal year without supplemental [funds],” Satterfield said. Quinn is asking for an additional $73.6 million.
Advocates say that families who are kicked off TANF under the proposed eligibility change would likely have nowhere else to turn. “I mean, that’s more of a hardship because you’ve got families that this is the last safety net, so if you remove this, then they have no income whatsoever,” said Dan Lesser, director of economic justice at the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law in Chicago, who also did not find the increase in TANF cases surprising. “The reason why the TANF caseload is growing is because of the economy. These are all programs that should grow when there is a recession; they are there to replace income [that] people don’t have because of the recession.”
According to Lesser, shifting TANF eligibility from five years to three years would instantly affect 3,000 Illinois families and more families every month after. “There is no policy justification for doing this; they haven’t even offered policy justification. This is the worst possible time, with the state of the economy [and] the long period of times people are going between jobs, to shorten the time limit,” Lesser said.
As lawmakers look to cut billions from the state’s Medicaid liability, other programs geared at helping Illinoisans in poverty may also see substantial reductions.
Gov. Pat Quinn’s proposed budget would cap lifetime eligibility for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Family Program, formerly known as welfare, at three years. TANF provides cash assistance to pregnant women or families with children, and lifetime benefits are currently capped at five years. Quinn has also proposed reductions to job training and placement programs offered through the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps. However, Quinn’s plan does not call for cuts to food stamps, which are paid for with federal funds.
In recent years, income assistance programs have all seen increases, and the Department of Human Services says it cannot afford to keep pace. According to Michelle Saddler, secretary of the Illinois Department of Human Services, the proposed cuts are a result of the increased demands in services — a result of the recession that hit Illinois hard. The department has seen a spike in demands on its income assistance programs and programs that assist persons with developmental disabilities and mental disabilities in the wake of the recession. “Some of those increased cost come from increased demand. As we all know, there has been an economic downturn. During an economic downturn more and more people need services,” Saddler said. According to Linda Satterfield, director of the Division of Family and Community Services at DHS, caseloads at local offices have grown 38 percent in the last five years. “Last year, the TANF caseload was 38,500. Our TANF caseload has grown to 46,000. We have the 12th largest TANF caseload in the nation, and our processing time ranks 51st,” said Satterfield.
Increased demand for the TANF program is squeezing out other programs that rely on the same funds. Quinn’s administration has notified child care providers in the state that they may see payments delayed at least until the next fiscal year starts in July because they are paid out of the same fund as TANF benefits. Under federal welfare reform passed in the '90s, states can spend TANF dollars on programs besides cash assistance, such as child care and job training. Quinn is seeking a supplemental appropriation from lawmakers to try to keep TANF assistance and child care subsidies afloat. “We will not be able to get through this fiscal year without supplemental [funds],” Satterfield said. Quinn is asking for an additional $73.6 million.
Advocates say that families who are kicked off TANF under the proposed eligibility change would likely have nowhere else to turn. “I mean, that’s more of a hardship because you’ve got families that this is the last safety net, so if you remove this, then they have no income whatsoever,” said Dan Lesser, director of economic justice at the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law in Chicago, who also did not find the increase in TANF cases surprising. “The reason why the TANF caseload is growing is because of the economy. These are all programs that should grow when there is a recession; they are there to replace income [that] people don’t have because of the recession.”
According to Lesser, shifting TANF eligibility from five years to three years would instantly affect 3,000 Illinois families and more families every month after. “There is no policy justification for doing this; they haven’t even offered policy justification. This is the worst possible time, with the state of the economy [and] the long period of times people are going between jobs, to shorten the time limit,” Lesser said.
Chicago mayor jumps into Statehouse pension debate
By Jamey Dunn
As lawmakers look to scale back retirement benefits for state employees, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel asked them to also consider cutting benefits for workers in his city.
Emanuel presented the broad strokes of his proposal to change the city’s six pension systems to an Illinois House committee today. He proposed:
The mayor’s proposal would have to be approved by the General Assembly, and it would apply to Chicago’s pension systems for laborers, municipal employees, teachers, police officers, firefighters and park employees.
Emanuel estimated that his plan would eliminate about 40 percent of the city’s $20 billion unfunded pension liability. He said that growing pension costs are crowding out other vital services. “Our taxpayers cannot afford to chose between pensions and police officers or pensions and paved streets or pensions and public health,” he said. “Our pension payment will eventually squeeze out every essential that residents require and a city must provide.”
Emanuel projected that if nothing is done to scale back benefits for city employees, property taxes would have to be increased by 150 percent to keep up with the cost. “I do not believe that property taxes should go up 150 percent. No business will come to the city of Chicago or Chicago land area, and no family will relocate [there].”
He praised Gov. Pat Quinn’s plan to reform the state’s pension system and acknowledged similarities in the underfunding that Chicago pensions and state pensions are facing. He said taxpayers and workers are not to blame. The mayor said that politicians have not been honest with the public in the past about the magnitude of the problem and have made promises to workers that they cannot keep. While his plan shares some components with Quinn’s, he said Chicago has different needs. “We are facing problems that a one-size fits all framework will not fit.”
House Speaker Michael Madigan agreed that Chicago and the state face similar problems when it comes to pensions. “Well, I think he delivered his message that the city pension systems need to be reviewed. They need to be examined. They’re not financially sustainable as they’re currently constituted. It’s very similar to what we’re doing here at the state level with the state pension systems. I’ve been very much involved in that. Same issues,” Madigan told reporters today.
The mayor came out strongly in favor of Quinn’s proposal to have school districts outside of Chicago take on some of the cost for teachers’ retirement. He said it is unfair that Chicago covers most of the cost for its teachers while school districts outside of the city do not. “Only taxpayers in Chicago pay for the pensions of their own teachers and those teachers statewide. If taxpayers in Northbrook or Springfield or Marion were faced with that kind of double duty, their mayors would not tolerate it. And as mayor of Chicago, neither will I.”
House Minority Leader Tom Cross said there are other funding inequities between Chicago and downstate that benefit the city, and any potential unfairness should be considered in the context of all state spending. Cross and other Republicans have been less than enthusiastic about the possibility of shifting costs to local school districts. Cross said it would do nothing to address the problem of the unfunded liability. Republicans who have been more vocally opposed have said that it would decimate school budgets. Besides the call for a cost shift, Cross was supportive of Emanuel’s plan. “I like his concept. I like the governor’s concept. I like our concept,” Cross said. “We’re ready to go. We need to do this now.”
Unions decried Emanuel’s plan, saying that he is blowing the situation out of proportion. “What he’s trying to do is alarm the tax payer and pit them against the Chicago Police officers and the fireman that protect our city every single day,” said Michael Shields, president of the Fraternal Order of Police Chicago Lodge 7. “A guy does 30 years, 27 years down the road you can’t just change the rules of the game for the employee. It’s an individual contract between the employee and the employer and you cannot reduce those benefits. It’s against the constitution in Illinois.”
Union officials say Emanuel sprung the proposal on them during today’s hearing and voiced frustration about not being asked for input in the mayor’s plan. “The unions representing city employees have repeatedly conveyed to the mayor our willingness to work constructively to solve the pension funding problem. Yet he has never once met with us to hear our views or put forward the suggestions he unveiled today,” Henry Bayer, executive director of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31, said in a prepared statement. “No one has a bigger interest in assuring the fiscal stability of city pension funds than the retirees and employees who depend upon them. Our union remains committed to working toward a solution that is fair and constitutional, but we need an administration that shares our commitment to a collaborative process and a genuine solution.”
Emanuel said his “framework” is just the start of a discussion over pension reform for Chicago. He said he would use all the political capital he may have with the legislature to help back reforms to both the state’s pensions systems and the city’s pensions systems through the legislative process this session. But, Emanuel said, getting something passed this spring is not a given. “I never underestimate — given that you’re about to make change — the difficulties surrounding it,’ he said. “Because details matter.”
As lawmakers look to scale back retirement benefits for state employees, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel asked them to also consider cutting benefits for workers in his city.
Emanuel presented the broad strokes of his proposal to change the city’s six pension systems to an Illinois House committee today. He proposed:
- A freeze on cost of living increases for 10 years. After 10 years, the COLAs would not be figured on a compounded basis.
- A phased in contribution increase for employees. Employees currently contribute between 8 percent and 9 percent of their pay depending on which system they are in. Under Emanuel’s plan, that would increase by a percentage point each year for five years. After five years, the average cost employees pay would be 14 percent.
- A five year increase in retirement age that Emanuel said would be phased in over time. This change would increase the age to 67 for most city workers and 60 for police officers and firefighters.
The mayor’s proposal would have to be approved by the General Assembly, and it would apply to Chicago’s pension systems for laborers, municipal employees, teachers, police officers, firefighters and park employees.
Emanuel estimated that his plan would eliminate about 40 percent of the city’s $20 billion unfunded pension liability. He said that growing pension costs are crowding out other vital services. “Our taxpayers cannot afford to chose between pensions and police officers or pensions and paved streets or pensions and public health,” he said. “Our pension payment will eventually squeeze out every essential that residents require and a city must provide.”
Emanuel projected that if nothing is done to scale back benefits for city employees, property taxes would have to be increased by 150 percent to keep up with the cost. “I do not believe that property taxes should go up 150 percent. No business will come to the city of Chicago or Chicago land area, and no family will relocate [there].”
He praised Gov. Pat Quinn’s plan to reform the state’s pension system and acknowledged similarities in the underfunding that Chicago pensions and state pensions are facing. He said taxpayers and workers are not to blame. The mayor said that politicians have not been honest with the public in the past about the magnitude of the problem and have made promises to workers that they cannot keep. While his plan shares some components with Quinn’s, he said Chicago has different needs. “We are facing problems that a one-size fits all framework will not fit.”
House Speaker Michael Madigan agreed that Chicago and the state face similar problems when it comes to pensions. “Well, I think he delivered his message that the city pension systems need to be reviewed. They need to be examined. They’re not financially sustainable as they’re currently constituted. It’s very similar to what we’re doing here at the state level with the state pension systems. I’ve been very much involved in that. Same issues,” Madigan told reporters today.
The mayor came out strongly in favor of Quinn’s proposal to have school districts outside of Chicago take on some of the cost for teachers’ retirement. He said it is unfair that Chicago covers most of the cost for its teachers while school districts outside of the city do not. “Only taxpayers in Chicago pay for the pensions of their own teachers and those teachers statewide. If taxpayers in Northbrook or Springfield or Marion were faced with that kind of double duty, their mayors would not tolerate it. And as mayor of Chicago, neither will I.”
House Minority Leader Tom Cross said there are other funding inequities between Chicago and downstate that benefit the city, and any potential unfairness should be considered in the context of all state spending. Cross and other Republicans have been less than enthusiastic about the possibility of shifting costs to local school districts. Cross said it would do nothing to address the problem of the unfunded liability. Republicans who have been more vocally opposed have said that it would decimate school budgets. Besides the call for a cost shift, Cross was supportive of Emanuel’s plan. “I like his concept. I like the governor’s concept. I like our concept,” Cross said. “We’re ready to go. We need to do this now.”
Unions decried Emanuel’s plan, saying that he is blowing the situation out of proportion. “What he’s trying to do is alarm the tax payer and pit them against the Chicago Police officers and the fireman that protect our city every single day,” said Michael Shields, president of the Fraternal Order of Police Chicago Lodge 7. “A guy does 30 years, 27 years down the road you can’t just change the rules of the game for the employee. It’s an individual contract between the employee and the employer and you cannot reduce those benefits. It’s against the constitution in Illinois.”
Union officials say Emanuel sprung the proposal on them during today’s hearing and voiced frustration about not being asked for input in the mayor’s plan. “The unions representing city employees have repeatedly conveyed to the mayor our willingness to work constructively to solve the pension funding problem. Yet he has never once met with us to hear our views or put forward the suggestions he unveiled today,” Henry Bayer, executive director of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31, said in a prepared statement. “No one has a bigger interest in assuring the fiscal stability of city pension funds than the retirees and employees who depend upon them. Our union remains committed to working toward a solution that is fair and constitutional, but we need an administration that shares our commitment to a collaborative process and a genuine solution.”
Emanuel said his “framework” is just the start of a discussion over pension reform for Chicago. He said he would use all the political capital he may have with the legislature to help back reforms to both the state’s pensions systems and the city’s pensions systems through the legislative process this session. But, Emanuel said, getting something passed this spring is not a given. “I never underestimate — given that you’re about to make change — the difficulties surrounding it,’ he said. “Because details matter.”
Thursday, May 03, 2012
Voters will decide on requirements for increasing pension benefits
By Ashley Griffin
Illinois is one step closer to making it more difficult to increase pension benefits for state employees, but voters will get the final decision in November.
The Senate today passed House Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 49, which is a constitutional amendment that would require a three-fifths vote by the General Assembly to enhance public employee pension benefits. That means that instead of 30 votes in the Senate and 60 votes in House needed to pass, the new amendment would require 36 votes in the Senate and 71 votes in the House. The measure passed the Senate with 51 “yes” votes and 2 “no” votes. It now has passed both legislative chambers and will be on the November ballot for voters to decide on.
“There’s a lot of tough medicine in this resolution. I think the tough medicine is needed,” said House Speaker Michael Madigan.
The measure comes at a time when lawmakers are trying to reform the state’s crumbling pension system. Currently, the pension systems have more than $80 billion in liabilities. Earlier last month, Gov. Quinn released his own plan to help mend the system that would require employees to choose between keeping subsidized retiree health care or accepting diminished benefits. Under the proposal, employee contributions would rise by3 percent, and the retirement age would jump to 67.
But union officials say the amendment does not address the problems with the pension system, which were caused primarily by governors and lawmakers who opted to skip payments. “This measure is misleading to the public. Though cast as “reform,” it would do nothing to solve the real problem plaguing Illinois public retirement systems, which is a lack of funding, not excess benefits,” said Anders Lindall, a spokesperson for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31.
Lindall said that the pensions earned by teachers, police, caregivers and other public employees are modest— $32,000 a year on average. He said many public workers aren’t eligible for Social Security, and they have always paid their share of retirement costs — typically 8 to 10 percent of every pay check.
When lawmakers reduced pension for workers hired after January of last year, concerns were raised that the benefits might not be generous enough to allow workers who do not collect Social Security, such as teachers and university employees, to remain outside of the government retirement program. Lindall said that if that new pension program needs to be fixed, this amendment would make it difficult.
However, Madigan said that support for sweetening the benefits of those hired under the new pension benefits system is part of his motivation for sponsoring the amendment. “I’ve already been in conversations where people are saying that the tier two — that was created a few years ago and is in place for those hired to public jobs after Jan 1 of 2011 — is not sufficient. That it has to be improved. That we have to make it better,” Madigan said. “So that’s another reason to support this resolution and raise that vote count because those that even in the current crisis think that we ought to be improving pensions are here at the Capitol building already laying the seeds for what will be their efforts very shortly to again improve pension benefits.”
For now, the fate of the proposal will have to wait until November. To become a part of the state’s Constitution, the proposal must receive the support of either three-fifths of those voting on the question or the majority of those voting in the election.
Illinois is one step closer to making it more difficult to increase pension benefits for state employees, but voters will get the final decision in November.
The Senate today passed House Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 49, which is a constitutional amendment that would require a three-fifths vote by the General Assembly to enhance public employee pension benefits. That means that instead of 30 votes in the Senate and 60 votes in House needed to pass, the new amendment would require 36 votes in the Senate and 71 votes in the House. The measure passed the Senate with 51 “yes” votes and 2 “no” votes. It now has passed both legislative chambers and will be on the November ballot for voters to decide on.
“There’s a lot of tough medicine in this resolution. I think the tough medicine is needed,” said House Speaker Michael Madigan.
The measure comes at a time when lawmakers are trying to reform the state’s crumbling pension system. Currently, the pension systems have more than $80 billion in liabilities. Earlier last month, Gov. Quinn released his own plan to help mend the system that would require employees to choose between keeping subsidized retiree health care or accepting diminished benefits. Under the proposal, employee contributions would rise by3 percent, and the retirement age would jump to 67.
But union officials say the amendment does not address the problems with the pension system, which were caused primarily by governors and lawmakers who opted to skip payments. “This measure is misleading to the public. Though cast as “reform,” it would do nothing to solve the real problem plaguing Illinois public retirement systems, which is a lack of funding, not excess benefits,” said Anders Lindall, a spokesperson for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31.
Lindall said that the pensions earned by teachers, police, caregivers and other public employees are modest— $32,000 a year on average. He said many public workers aren’t eligible for Social Security, and they have always paid their share of retirement costs — typically 8 to 10 percent of every pay check.
When lawmakers reduced pension for workers hired after January of last year, concerns were raised that the benefits might not be generous enough to allow workers who do not collect Social Security, such as teachers and university employees, to remain outside of the government retirement program. Lindall said that if that new pension program needs to be fixed, this amendment would make it difficult.
However, Madigan said that support for sweetening the benefits of those hired under the new pension benefits system is part of his motivation for sponsoring the amendment. “I’ve already been in conversations where people are saying that the tier two — that was created a few years ago and is in place for those hired to public jobs after Jan 1 of 2011 — is not sufficient. That it has to be improved. That we have to make it better,” Madigan said. “So that’s another reason to support this resolution and raise that vote count because those that even in the current crisis think that we ought to be improving pensions are here at the Capitol building already laying the seeds for what will be their efforts very shortly to again improve pension benefits.”
For now, the fate of the proposal will have to wait until November. To become a part of the state’s Constitution, the proposal must receive the support of either three-fifths of those voting on the question or the majority of those voting in the election.
Legislative scholarship program may come to an end
By Jamey Dunn
College scholarships handed out by members of the Illinois General Assembly may soon be a thing of the past.
The Senate voted today to end the program that allows lawmakers to hand out tuition waivers for state schools to students in their legislative districts. The scholarships came under scrutiny after it was reported that lawmakers have awarded them to students outside of their districts, as well as to the children of campaign contributors. Senate President John Cullerton has been reluctant to end to program, saying in the past that it could be reformed. But after half the members of his chamber signed on as sponsors of House Bill 3810, Cullerton decided to advance the legislation.
“You wouldn’t think that we would take relish in eliminating over 1,400 opportunities for kids to have scholarships to go to college,’ Cullerton said. “But there were abuses. And we have some major, major issues to deal with down here in the next month, and everybody knows what a distraction this is.”
Republicans in the chamber commended Cullerton for his change of heart. “It’s not easy to change your position in this building,’ said Sen. Kirk Dillard, a Hinsdale Republican. Dillard said he once supported the program, but today he called it a “dinosaur.” “Times change. Times change fiscally. Times change ethically. … It’s time as an institution that we let this perk — which was properly used for many years — go. And it is time that we step up and do what’s right,” Dillard said.
Cullerton tacked a provision onto the bill that calls for a commission to review all the tuition waivers given out to students at state schools. He says that $414 million in waivers were used by students this year. “Many of these things have no standards whatsoever. So the same attention that everybody put on legislative scholarships ought to be put on the other tuition waivers. And we might have that task force also address the concern about eliminating the opportunity for these young people to get a college education.” The legislative scholarships were worth about $13.5 million annually.
Those who want to keep the General Assembly program going say that it provides opportunities to kids who may not otherwise get a chance to go to college and evenly spreads financial assistance throughout the state. “It’s almost [putting] the cart before the horse that we have this commission to take a look at scholarship waivers and at the same time abolish this program. Why not wait until we get findings that will determine the legitimacy of this program?” said Maywood Democratic Sen. Kimberly Lightford. “I would urge [you] later in the month when we’re talking education funding and we’re talking [Monetary Assistance Program] funding to remember this vote that you just took. Because those same individuals who are now unable to receive scholarships will need more MAP grant opportunities,” she said during floor debate of the bill in the Senate.
Because the bill has been amended in the Senate, the House has to approve the change before it would go to Gov. Pat Quinn. Quinn has pushed for the elimination of the program and is sure to sign the measure if it lands on his desk. “Today, the Illinois Senate took a big step forward to do the right thing. I want to salute President John Cullerton for his leadership and urge the House to quickly concur with this long-overdue ethics reform,” Quinn said in a prepared statement. “Abolishing a political scholarship program is the right thing for deserving students who need financial assistance to attend college. Illinois deserves to have a strong scholarship program that helps needy students go to college. As I have repeatedly advocated: Scholarships paid for by Illinois taxpayers should be awarded only to those with merit who are in true financial need.”
College scholarships handed out by members of the Illinois General Assembly may soon be a thing of the past.
The Senate voted today to end the program that allows lawmakers to hand out tuition waivers for state schools to students in their legislative districts. The scholarships came under scrutiny after it was reported that lawmakers have awarded them to students outside of their districts, as well as to the children of campaign contributors. Senate President John Cullerton has been reluctant to end to program, saying in the past that it could be reformed. But after half the members of his chamber signed on as sponsors of House Bill 3810, Cullerton decided to advance the legislation.
“You wouldn’t think that we would take relish in eliminating over 1,400 opportunities for kids to have scholarships to go to college,’ Cullerton said. “But there were abuses. And we have some major, major issues to deal with down here in the next month, and everybody knows what a distraction this is.”
Republicans in the chamber commended Cullerton for his change of heart. “It’s not easy to change your position in this building,’ said Sen. Kirk Dillard, a Hinsdale Republican. Dillard said he once supported the program, but today he called it a “dinosaur.” “Times change. Times change fiscally. Times change ethically. … It’s time as an institution that we let this perk — which was properly used for many years — go. And it is time that we step up and do what’s right,” Dillard said.
Cullerton tacked a provision onto the bill that calls for a commission to review all the tuition waivers given out to students at state schools. He says that $414 million in waivers were used by students this year. “Many of these things have no standards whatsoever. So the same attention that everybody put on legislative scholarships ought to be put on the other tuition waivers. And we might have that task force also address the concern about eliminating the opportunity for these young people to get a college education.” The legislative scholarships were worth about $13.5 million annually.
Those who want to keep the General Assembly program going say that it provides opportunities to kids who may not otherwise get a chance to go to college and evenly spreads financial assistance throughout the state. “It’s almost [putting] the cart before the horse that we have this commission to take a look at scholarship waivers and at the same time abolish this program. Why not wait until we get findings that will determine the legitimacy of this program?” said Maywood Democratic Sen. Kimberly Lightford. “I would urge [you] later in the month when we’re talking education funding and we’re talking [Monetary Assistance Program] funding to remember this vote that you just took. Because those same individuals who are now unable to receive scholarships will need more MAP grant opportunities,” she said during floor debate of the bill in the Senate.
Because the bill has been amended in the Senate, the House has to approve the change before it would go to Gov. Pat Quinn. Quinn has pushed for the elimination of the program and is sure to sign the measure if it lands on his desk. “Today, the Illinois Senate took a big step forward to do the right thing. I want to salute President John Cullerton for his leadership and urge the House to quickly concur with this long-overdue ethics reform,” Quinn said in a prepared statement. “Abolishing a political scholarship program is the right thing for deserving students who need financial assistance to attend college. Illinois deserves to have a strong scholarship program that helps needy students go to college. As I have repeatedly advocated: Scholarships paid for by Illinois taxpayers should be awarded only to those with merit who are in true financial need.”
Wednesday, May 02, 2012
Cullerton reverses support for legislative scholarships
By Jamey Dunn
After pressure from lawmakers and years of public scrutiny, Senate President John Cullerton is sponsoring a bill to end the legislative scholarship program.
Cullerton said he had hoped the program could be reformed. But after the majority of the Senate signed on to a bill to eliminate the program, he said he decided to move ahead with the idea. “There have been some abuses of the program, and yet a lot of young people have received scholarships and benefited from that,” he said. However, Cullerton said that the issue is becoming too great of a distraction during a legislative session when lawmakers hope to reform the state’s Medicaid and pension systems. Calls to end the legislative scholarship program, which allows lawmakers to hand out tuition waivers for state universities to students in their districts, came after reports of lawmakers awarding waivers to the children of politically connected individuals or campaign contributors.
House Bill 3810 was approved by a Senate committee today with Cullerton as a lead sponsor. The measure, which passed in the House, has an added provision. Cullerton is calling for a task force to study all tuition fees and waivers doled out by state universities. “Many people have questioned whether or not there should be some standards applied to those. … because they cost the state a lot of money.” Cullerton said about $356 million in such waivers are given out annually. Legislative scholarships account for $13.5 million of that total.
House Minority Leader Christine Radogno said that lawmakers should scrutinize such waivers because they allow some students to avoid paying a portion of tuition and fees while other must pay the full cost. “In addition to the abuses, though — and I understand that not all of the [legislative] scholarships have been abused — we have to understand that this is a cost shift,” Radogno said. “It is high time we do it.” The bill would not apply to the 2012-2013 school year, but no new waivers would be handed out after September. “Some people have already started the process of awarding the scholarships,” Cullerton explained.
Opponents say the program gives opportunities to students who might not otherwise have the chance to go to college. “I’m not glad to see this happen,” said Maywood Democratic Sen. Kimberly Lightford.“I think it’s a travesty for education in the state of Illinois.” Lightford said the program ensures that financial help for higher education is being evenly distributed across the state, since the waivers can be doled out in each legislative district. “I believe the General Assembly scholarship program was fair. It was consistent across the state.” She said lawmakers should wait to hear what the proposed task force says about the legislative program before deciding to abolish it.
After pressure from lawmakers and years of public scrutiny, Senate President John Cullerton is sponsoring a bill to end the legislative scholarship program.
Cullerton said he had hoped the program could be reformed. But after the majority of the Senate signed on to a bill to eliminate the program, he said he decided to move ahead with the idea. “There have been some abuses of the program, and yet a lot of young people have received scholarships and benefited from that,” he said. However, Cullerton said that the issue is becoming too great of a distraction during a legislative session when lawmakers hope to reform the state’s Medicaid and pension systems. Calls to end the legislative scholarship program, which allows lawmakers to hand out tuition waivers for state universities to students in their districts, came after reports of lawmakers awarding waivers to the children of politically connected individuals or campaign contributors.
House Bill 3810 was approved by a Senate committee today with Cullerton as a lead sponsor. The measure, which passed in the House, has an added provision. Cullerton is calling for a task force to study all tuition fees and waivers doled out by state universities. “Many people have questioned whether or not there should be some standards applied to those. … because they cost the state a lot of money.” Cullerton said about $356 million in such waivers are given out annually. Legislative scholarships account for $13.5 million of that total.
House Minority Leader Christine Radogno said that lawmakers should scrutinize such waivers because they allow some students to avoid paying a portion of tuition and fees while other must pay the full cost. “In addition to the abuses, though — and I understand that not all of the [legislative] scholarships have been abused — we have to understand that this is a cost shift,” Radogno said. “It is high time we do it.” The bill would not apply to the 2012-2013 school year, but no new waivers would be handed out after September. “Some people have already started the process of awarding the scholarships,” Cullerton explained.
Opponents say the program gives opportunities to students who might not otherwise have the chance to go to college. “I’m not glad to see this happen,” said Maywood Democratic Sen. Kimberly Lightford.“I think it’s a travesty for education in the state of Illinois.” Lightford said the program ensures that financial help for higher education is being evenly distributed across the state, since the waivers can be doled out in each legislative district. “I believe the General Assembly scholarship program was fair. It was consistent across the state.” She said lawmakers should wait to hear what the proposed task force says about the legislative program before deciding to abolish it.
Bill to cut state-subsidized health care advances
By Jamey Dunn
A House committee moved today to end a guarantee that the state will subsidize retiree health care.
State employees currently do not have to pay premiums for their health care if they have worked for 20 years or more. Legislators are not charged premiums if they serve for eight years or more. Under Senate Bill 1313, which is sponsored by House Speaker Michael Madigan and House Minority Leader Tom Cross, that deal would be eliminated. Instead, Central Management Services would present a premium that retired state employees, university employees, lawmakers and judges would have to pay. The measure would apply to current retirees. According to the sponsors of the bill, the number reached by CMS would apply to all the retirement systems equally and would be subject to collective bargaining negotiations. The estimated cost the state will pay for retiree health benefits for the current fiscal year is $876 million.
Madigan said that he does not consider the bill to be linked with negotiations about pension reform. Gov. Pat Quinn has proposed that employees be given the choice of keeping their subsidized health care benefits while seeing a reduction in their pension benefits or footing the bill for their health care while keeping their current benefits. “[SB1313 is] a significant step, and a step we clearly ought to take if, for no other reason, for no other reason, to set the tone for the budget making for the next 30 days,” Madigan said. He said he is backing the bill, in part, because of a request from Quinn's office. Quinn ducked the news media after a public appearance in Springfield today, and as of press time, his office had not replied to questions about the legislation.
Cross said that the number CMS comes to would likely be based on the amount of money lawmakers say is available to spend on retiree health care. He said the measure is not aimed at eliminating state subsidies for retiree health care but at stabilizing the program by asking workers to cover more of their health care costs. “There will be no more free health care coverage.”
Anders Lindall, a spokesman for the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees Council 31, said the idea that retirees receive free health care is “totally false.” He said that while they do not pay personal premiums, they do cover copays and deductibles. They also pay premiums for family members covered under their plans. “There is a very wide array of costs that retirees bear.” AFSCME estimates that retirees with average health care needs, not including treatment for a serious illness or long-term hospitalization, pay about $3,000 to their medical costs annually.
Lindall said that health care coverage is a part of employee compensation, and the venue for changing it is not the legislature but the collective bargaining table. AFSCME is currently in the process of renegotiating contracts with the state. “It gives the appearance of trying to end-run collective bargaining or to use the legislative process to manipulate collective bargaining to gain some type of advantage,” Lindall said. “And in this case, to use retirees as pawns in that game, I think that’s cynical. I know that tens of thousands of retirees now on fixed incomes and dependent on their affordable health insurance are worried and upset, and that shouldn’t be happening. They shouldn’t be used as collateral for anyone to achieve whatever other ends they have in mind.”
A House committee moved today to end a guarantee that the state will subsidize retiree health care.
State employees currently do not have to pay premiums for their health care if they have worked for 20 years or more. Legislators are not charged premiums if they serve for eight years or more. Under Senate Bill 1313, which is sponsored by House Speaker Michael Madigan and House Minority Leader Tom Cross, that deal would be eliminated. Instead, Central Management Services would present a premium that retired state employees, university employees, lawmakers and judges would have to pay. The measure would apply to current retirees. According to the sponsors of the bill, the number reached by CMS would apply to all the retirement systems equally and would be subject to collective bargaining negotiations. The estimated cost the state will pay for retiree health benefits for the current fiscal year is $876 million.
Madigan said that he does not consider the bill to be linked with negotiations about pension reform. Gov. Pat Quinn has proposed that employees be given the choice of keeping their subsidized health care benefits while seeing a reduction in their pension benefits or footing the bill for their health care while keeping their current benefits. “[SB1313 is] a significant step, and a step we clearly ought to take if, for no other reason, for no other reason, to set the tone for the budget making for the next 30 days,” Madigan said. He said he is backing the bill, in part, because of a request from Quinn's office. Quinn ducked the news media after a public appearance in Springfield today, and as of press time, his office had not replied to questions about the legislation.
Cross said that the number CMS comes to would likely be based on the amount of money lawmakers say is available to spend on retiree health care. He said the measure is not aimed at eliminating state subsidies for retiree health care but at stabilizing the program by asking workers to cover more of their health care costs. “There will be no more free health care coverage.”
Anders Lindall, a spokesman for the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees Council 31, said the idea that retirees receive free health care is “totally false.” He said that while they do not pay personal premiums, they do cover copays and deductibles. They also pay premiums for family members covered under their plans. “There is a very wide array of costs that retirees bear.” AFSCME estimates that retirees with average health care needs, not including treatment for a serious illness or long-term hospitalization, pay about $3,000 to their medical costs annually.
Lindall said that health care coverage is a part of employee compensation, and the venue for changing it is not the legislature but the collective bargaining table. AFSCME is currently in the process of renegotiating contracts with the state. “It gives the appearance of trying to end-run collective bargaining or to use the legislative process to manipulate collective bargaining to gain some type of advantage,” Lindall said. “And in this case, to use retirees as pawns in that game, I think that’s cynical. I know that tens of thousands of retirees now on fixed incomes and dependent on their affordable health insurance are worried and upset, and that shouldn’t be happening. They shouldn’t be used as collateral for anyone to achieve whatever other ends they have in mind.”
Tuesday, May 01, 2012
Lawmaker wants another shot at changing eavesdropping law
By Ashley Griffin
Rep. Elaine Nekritz seeks to resurrect a controversial bill that would change the state’s eavesdropping law.
Nekritz is the sponsor of House Bill 3944, which failed in the House — with 45 “yes” votes to 59 “no” votes —in March. The measure would have allowed for audio recording of police officers while on duty and in a public place. Currently, recording police officers without their approval is a Class 1 felony that can come with a punishment of up to 15 years in prison. There have been several recent high-profile cases in which the defendant who recorded police said he or she had no idea while making the recording that such a move is illegal in the state.
Nekritz laid out proposed changes to her plan today. She said the revised measure, Senate Bill 1808, seeks to satisfy some concerns law enforcement officials had about her first bill. “The amendment that we added and the change that we have added addresses the situation where someone might make an audio recording and alter it, and then try to use that as evidence of some wrongdoing by that police officer. ... The amendment we’ve offered would require that tape be turned over to the state’s attorney for review of that,” Nekritz said.
Nekritz believes that this time around, the proposal will have more success. “We obviously had a bill that came forward earlier in the year that did not receive an adequate number of votes. We have listened to the concerns of law enforcement and have changed the bill to try to address some of those concerns. We think we have some momentum in the Illinois House to have a different outcome on this vote.”
She said the legislation is not a response to the fact that Chicago will be hosting the NATO summit later this month, but she said it has gotten the issue more attention and made it easier to explain the need for a change to the current law. “We’d like to get it done by then, but we’re going to keep pushing to get it down by the end of session.” The Chicago Police Department reportedly plans not to enforce the law during the NATO summit. But Nekritz conceded that there are no guarantees that protesters and journalists might face legal troubles if they record police officers without permission. “The threat still exists, I think, for journalists that are going to be covering the NATO summit,” she said. The bill is scheduled for a committee hearing Wednesday morning.
Rep. Elaine Nekritz seeks to resurrect a controversial bill that would change the state’s eavesdropping law.
Nekritz is the sponsor of House Bill 3944, which failed in the House — with 45 “yes” votes to 59 “no” votes —in March. The measure would have allowed for audio recording of police officers while on duty and in a public place. Currently, recording police officers without their approval is a Class 1 felony that can come with a punishment of up to 15 years in prison. There have been several recent high-profile cases in which the defendant who recorded police said he or she had no idea while making the recording that such a move is illegal in the state.
Nekritz laid out proposed changes to her plan today. She said the revised measure, Senate Bill 1808, seeks to satisfy some concerns law enforcement officials had about her first bill. “The amendment that we added and the change that we have added addresses the situation where someone might make an audio recording and alter it, and then try to use that as evidence of some wrongdoing by that police officer. ... The amendment we’ve offered would require that tape be turned over to the state’s attorney for review of that,” Nekritz said.
Nekritz believes that this time around, the proposal will have more success. “We obviously had a bill that came forward earlier in the year that did not receive an adequate number of votes. We have listened to the concerns of law enforcement and have changed the bill to try to address some of those concerns. We think we have some momentum in the Illinois House to have a different outcome on this vote.”
She said the legislation is not a response to the fact that Chicago will be hosting the NATO summit later this month, but she said it has gotten the issue more attention and made it easier to explain the need for a change to the current law. “We’d like to get it done by then, but we’re going to keep pushing to get it down by the end of session.” The Chicago Police Department reportedly plans not to enforce the law during the NATO summit. But Nekritz conceded that there are no guarantees that protesters and journalists might face legal troubles if they record police officers without permission. “The threat still exists, I think, for journalists that are going to be covering the NATO summit,” she said. The bill is scheduled for a committee hearing Wednesday morning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
