Above is from: http://www.sj-r.com/news/20160219/fight-over-cruzs-ballot-eligibility-moves-to-courtrooms/1?rssfeed=true
Sunday, February 21, 2016
Pritchards Perspective 2/16/16
February 17, 2016 - Gov Watch - 4 comments
Observations and comments about state government by State Representative Robert W. Pritchard.
Rep. Pritchard’s Perspective on Illinois Politics
February 16, 2016
In This Issue:
Reflections on the President’s Visit
Lots of Legislative Ideas
Lack of State Budget Growing Irreparable for Higher Education
University of Illinois Introduces 2021 Initiative
Governor Offers Way for State Museum to Reopen
Union Reintroduces Bill to Limit Governor’s Negotiating Powers
Reflections on the President’s Visit
Last Wednesday’s visit was the first time since Jimmy Carter and only the fourth time that a sitting president has addressed the Illinois General Assembly. It was certainly a reunion for the former State Senator and his comments were sprinkled with fond memories, but he had a strong message. You can watch the nearly hour-long speech of President Barack Obama here.
Typical of presidential visits, streets were blocked, lines were long, and excitement gripped the capital. The President appeared relaxed, comfortable in his familiar surroundings. Expectations were high that he would somehow break the hold of political gridlock that has prevented a state budget and solutions to our state’s economic recovery.
As with his State of the Union speech, the President focused on the need for civility in an increasingly hyper-partisan country. He reminisced about the bipartisan social gatherings of state legislators, frequent support for each-others’ legislation, and common goals for improving society. While that atmosphere has certainly eroded over the past 12 years, members of the House ate lunch together in one of the committee rooms for the first time in my experience before the President’s speech.
While the President urging to tone down the partisanship and his call for reducing the influence of money in politics received uniform applause, he actually fueled visual partisanship in his call for reforms. Each side of the aisle alternately either cheered loudly or sat stone silent when the President mentioned redistricting reform, easier voting process and party values.
I was extremely disappointed that the President’s limited time in Springfield apparently wasn’t spent bringing the Governor and legislative leaders together in an attempt to broker compromise. In talking with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle I believe there are reforms, cuts and revenue ideas that could garner support necessary to pass a budget and move our state forward. However, leaders on both sides need a mediator.
Lots of Legislative Ideas
The deadline for filing legislation in the House passed last week with a total of 1,959 new bills filed since the start of the year. You can view the bills I have filed here.
Legislation in areas highlighted by Governor Rauner’s State Address has been introduced to improve government efficiency and cut costs. Four bipartisan bills based on the recommendations of the Local Government Consolidation and Unfunded Mandates Task Force were filed. These bills will make it easier to consolidate duplicative, unnecessary, or excessive units of government via referendum.
Also recently filed was HB 4644, which contains much needed reforms to improve the procurement system by cutting out unnecessary red tape. Among the provisions of the bill is the creation of a pre-qualified pool of vendors in different categories of supplies and services. Another reform will allow the State to “piggyback” on the procurements of other states and governmental entities, a process known as cooperative purchasing. By reorganizing the procurement structure, the length of the Request for Proposal (RFP) process can be cut to a third of the long process now. Savings from this bill are estimated to be as high as $500 million a year.
Lack of Budget Growing Irreparable for Higher Education
Many social services have felt the impact of no state budget for months. The DeKalb community rallied this past week to point out the significant impact a lack of funding is also having on higher education communities. Similar rallies have been held by Eastern Illinois and Chicago State Universities.
Modest reserves are running out at community colleges and public universities across the state. As a result, hundreds of staff have been laid off, furlough days have been implemented, students have had to drop out of school for lack of MAP grants or child care, and classes have been cancelled. Highly sought after faculty have left Illinois and taken their research grants with them.
When college and university workers are let go along with greatly reduced operational spending, university and college communities feel it. I am supporting legislation (HB4521 and HB4539) to not only fund higher education and MAP grants but also resolve the funding for other areas of the budget. It would be a great help if citizens would urge state leaders to allow these bills to be considered and avoid further damage to Illinois.
University of Illinois Introduces 2021 Initiative
One university is not waiting for the entire budget situation to be resolved and is proposing its own compact with the state. The University of Illinois is working with legislators on a bill–called The 2021 Initiative– which would give the university a consistent appropriation and the means to cut its operating expenses in return for meeting certain metrics and objectives.
Details will be negotiated starting this week that would spell out responsibilities for each party in the compact and the benefits for students, taxpayers and the university. If successful, I predict other universities will follow this pilot agreement.
Governor Offers Way for State Museum to Reopen
The state museum in Springfield and several other locations has had to close its doors to the public due to the lack of a state budget and spending authority. Governor Rauner used an amendatory veto (AV) to SB 317 that would allow the museum to reopen using private funding. The proposed new operating plan will include the State Museum’s first-ever admission fee for visitors, and increased help from volunteer aides and private-sector donors/friends of the Museum.
Speaker Madigan and President Cullerton have yet to rule the AV “in order”, meaning that they accept the changes made. If they fail to agree with the changes the bill will likely die and the Museum will remain closed.
Union Reintroduces Bill to Limit Governor’s Negotiating Powers
Tension among state workers, who are members of AFSCME currently negotiating a new contract, continues to grow. While the union says it is still willing to negotiate, the Governor has asked the Illinois State Labor Relations Board if the negotiations for a new contract have reached an impasse.
Not waiting for a ruling, AFSCME supports an amendment to HB580 which passed out of committee last week to provide for impasse arbitration should negotiations be resumed but fail to reach an agreement within a specified time. If the Illinois Labor Relations Board rules in favor of the administration, it could open the door to the administration imposing its contract terms on AFSCME. The union would then have to decide whether to accept the terms, go on strike, or challenge the labor board’s ruling in court.
HB580 language is similar to SB 1229 which passed the legislature, was vetoed and the veto was not over-ridden.
Libraries Rally to Talk about Legislation
I met with most of my local libraries and attended a meeting of the Illinois Library Association last week to discuss the impact of no state budget upon their operations and possible legislation this spring.
Libraries normally receive per capital state grants and equalization grants for smaller libraries through the Secretary of State’s office, but not this year. They are among the casualties of the budget stalemate.
From my observations they use the funds they receive efficiently and play an important role in encouraging reading, sourcing information, assisting with computer access, providing inexpensive entertainment, and offering a safe environment.
The legislature returns to Springfield Tuesday for work on legislation and to hear the Governor’s 2017 Budget address on Wednesday.
Bob Pritchard
District Office 815-748-3494 or E-Mail to bob@pritchardstaterep.com
Above is from: http://dekalbcountyonline.com/2016/02/pritchards-perspective-21616/
Chuck Sweeny: In Boone County some nonprofits get fee waiver, others don't
In Boone County, the county code exempts some nonprofit groups from paying the full fee for food service permits, while making others pay the restaurant rate.
Chuck Sweeny is senior editor at the Rockford Register Star and rrstar.com. RRSTAR.COM FILE PHOTO
Greg Kelm, who heads the Boone County Veterans' Club, has been arguing with the Boone County Health Department since 2008, when he applied for a food service permit and requested a nonprofit exemption from the fee charged to for-profit restaurants. The department refused to give his club the exemption, as it has continued to do to this day.
Kelm says that's not fair, noting that while the veterans' club has to pay $470 for a yearly food service license, the American Legion post has to pay only $20. Both are nonprofit corporations under federal tax law.
On Feb. 10, he wrote to the Boone County Board's Health and Human Services Committee, reminding the panel that the county's code says "bonafide not-for-profit agencies and organizations which operate food service establishments are subject to the permitting, inspection and other requirements of this Code with the exception of the payment of permit fees."
Why the discrepancy? Well the Internal Revenue Service has 31 kinds of nonprofit corporations under its 501 classification. The Veterans' Club is a 501(c)7 corporation, while the Legion post is a 501(c)3. The Health Department decided several years ago that the only nonprofits to get a food service fee waiver would be 501(c)3 corporations. Churches are 501(c)3s. All other nonprofits would have to pay the same fee that is charged to for-profit restaurants.
The problem is, that's not what the county code says. Kelm says the Health Department can't decide arbitrarily which nonprofits can have exemptions and which can't.
"I went to the Health Board meeting on Feb. 1 and said, 'Quit beating the little guys up. Leave the not-for-profits alone,' " Kelm told me Friday. He plans on going back to the Health Board at the Feb. 29 meeting.
He pointed out the absurdity of the Legion paying $20 and the Veterans' Club paying $470 for doing the same things: "We have breakfasts, they have breakfasts. We have fish fries, they have chicken dinners. The county can't choose which 501s are tax-exempt and which aren't. Our fees to the Health Department have gone up 522 percent over the last 10 years."
Well, it turns out that Cindy Frank, administrator of the Boone County Health Department for the past four years, recognizes the problem she inherited and agrees that it should be resolved. At this point she isn't sure how.
"Our county code states that not-for-profits were not to be charged (the regular rate for food service permits), but they never clarified what nonprofits were to be exempt," she said.
But because the county code is not explicit, the Health Department doesn't have the authority to decide who does and who doesn't get an exemption.
"Mr. Kelm is going to come back and talk to us about that. I'm not sure where we go from here," Frank said.
The food service fee exemption is something that only Boone County and one other in Illinois offer to nonprofits, Frank said.
Some County Board members want to make all nonprofits pay the full fee, said County Board member Cathy Ward. A measure to do that was voted down in November by the County Board. Ward believes all nonprofits should receive the food service fee exemption.
But Frank countered that "if we give food permit exemptions to all not-for-profits, we just can't afford it."
The administrator said that nonprofits require inspections, the same as restaurants. "If there's an incident, we have to investigate. The risk is higher. What we want to do is educate people," she said.
Kelm is asking Boone County for repayment of $1,260. That's the cost of the Veterans' Club's food service permits for the past three years. Think he'll get it?
Chuck Sweeny: 815-987-1366; csweeny@rrstar.com; @chucksweeny
Above is from: http://www.rrstar.com/article/20160219/NEWS/160219441/0/SEARCH?template=printart
The Kochs Are Plotting A Multimillion-Dollar Assault On Electric Vehicles
Peter Stone Freelance Reporter
The oil and gas industry may have thought it had killed the electric car, but sales -- boosted by generous government subsidies -- rose dramatically between 2010 and 2014, and energy giants are worried the thing may have come back to life.
Time to kill it again.
A new group that's being cobbled together with fossil fuel backing hopes to spend about $10 million dollars per year to boost petroleum-based transportation fuels and attack government subsidies for electric vehicles, according to refining industry sources familiar with the plan. A Koch Industries board member and a veteran Washington energy lobbyist are working quietly to fund and launch the new advocacy outfit.
Koch Industries, the nation's second-largest privately held corporation, is an energy and industrial conglomerate with $115 billion in annual revenues that is controlled by the multibillionaire brothers -- and prolific conservative donors -- Charles and David Koch. James Mahoney, a confidante of the brothers and member of their company's board, has teamed up with lobbyist Charlie Drevna, who until last year helmed the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers, for preliminary talks with several energy giants about funding the new pro-petroleum fuels group.
Late last year, Mahoney and Drevna flew into San Antonio to explain the need for a new group to executives at two Texas refining giants, Valero Energy and Tesoro Corp. Then, in late January, Mahoney moderated a seminar on “Changing the Energy Narrative” at the brothers' twice-a-year retreat for mega-donors in California. The panel drew a mix of CEOs from big energy companies and other wealthy attendees who, in conjunction with the Koch brothers, bankroll numerous conservative advocacy groups. And last month, Mahoney and Drevna had further conversations with Koch executives about the new project, sources say.
Neither Mahoney nor Drevna returned multiple calls seeking comment about the new group. A Koch spokesman also didn't respond to a request for comment.
It’s not clear when the still-unnamed group will be launched, but energy industry sources predict it’s likely to be up and running by this spring or summer, and that Koch Industries -- or a Koch foundation or allied nonprofit -- will be the lead financier.
“The fact that Jim Mahoney is leading the effort appears to indicate that this is being driven by the business side of Koch,” rather than the political operation that helps oversee the brothers' conservative advocacy empire, said one refining industry source familiar with the early plans for the new group.
Once launched, the new group is expected to use paid and earned media to push its pro-petroleum transportation messages, and do research to bolster the cause.
“I think they (are) approaching all the major independent refiners,” added a second industry source, who requested anonymity because he had not been authorized to speak about the private discussions. The group’s broad mission will be to “make the public aware of all the benefits of petroleum-based transportation fuels,” he explained, adding that “the current administration has a bias toward phasing out” these fuels.
The source also stressed that the new initiative is partly attributable to “electric vehicles and the subsidies for them."
"They’re worried about state and community subsidies," he added. "In 20 years, electric vehicles could have a substantial foothold in the U.S. market.”
The fledgling Mahoney and Drevna efforts seem to signal an expansion of Koch-backed drives against subsidies and tax breaks for alternative fuels to the transportation sector, at a time when support may be on the rise in Washington and some states for boosting electric vehicles.
Industry analysts and conservatives familiar with Koch world say the new initiative seems to fit the playbook that advocacy outfits backed by the Koch network have deployed in recent years to fight solar and wind power, battles that are fueled by ideology mixed with bottom line concerns.
“The Kochs have invested heavily in a pugnacious defense of fossil fuel consumption,” said one conservative energy analyst. “They’ve done this in the electricity sector, and as the debate shifts to transportation they’re behaving true to form.”
Other energy analysts point out that electric vehicle usage is likely to accelerate before long, which could catch a number of energy companies off guard.
“Electric vehicle adoption started slowly, but it certainly is going to follow an exponential growth trajectory,” said Varun Sivaram, an energy and environment fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. “Once electric vehicle adoption hits a critical mass, I think it will take refiners, petroleum producers and automakers by surprise.”
More broadly, some veteran energy lobbyists note that attacks on electric vehicle subsidies could backfire.
"Producers and refiners need to be careful in going after clean energy subsidies and incentives -- unless they're being paid for by the petroleum industry," said Don Duncan, a former top lobbyist for ConocoPhillips (which has now split in two). Duncan added that attacks on clean energy subsidies potentially “could again refocus the debate on subsidies and incentives enjoyed by producers and refiners."
Electric vehicles make up just 1 percent of the U.S. market, but some analysts see them rising to as much as 5 percent by 2025. Much of the impetus for boosting electric vehicles to curb climate change is coming from the government in the form of tax breaks and subsidies, and that’s a key reason why Koch and some refining industry allies are riled up.
Not long after the Obama administration took office, it set an ambitious goal of having 1 million plug-in electric vehicles on the road by last year. But only some 400,000 have reportedly been sold in the U.S. to date. In a new effort to spur the electric car and driverless car markets, Obama early this month called for a $10-a-barrel oil tax, a proposal that has little chance of passing Congress.
For Koch and other large refiners, the impact of a growing electric vehicle market could be significant down the road. Koch Industries' refining, pipeline and exploration operations contribute a healthy chunk of its $115 billion in annual revenues.
In their early forays to find financial backers, Mahoney and Drevna have turned to some old allies. Koch Industries has teamed up with Valero and Tesoro before. In 2010, Valero and Tesoro were the leading donors behind a multimillion-dollar California ballot initiative that was aimed at killing new state standards to reduce carbon emissions. Koch was also a big donor to the ballot campaign, which was defeated by environmental groups and other liberal interests.
The new group’s formation comes in the wake of other discussions in Koch circles, going back to 2013, about building a stronger pro-fossil-fuels message. At a donor retreat in mid-2013, discussions were held about the need to do more to bolster traditional fuels, according to an April 2014 email that Koch operative and fundraising honcho Kevin Gentry sent to scores of donors.
In that email, Gentry alluded to the importance of a new initiative that would “drive the national narrative around energy and the tremendous benefits of reliable affordable energy for all Americans, especially the less fortunate.” Gentry indicated that the energy initiative would be mounted by Freedom Partners, the fundraising hub for the Koch donor network which officially hosts the semiannual donor retreats.
To be sure, the Koch brothers and their network allies have long backed several nonprofit groups that have spent millions of dollars to fight alternative energy, notably wind and solar power projects, and poke holes in climate change science and regulations. The Koch brothers have repeatedly voiced skepticism that fossil fuel use contributes to global warming, and have long maintained that subsidies and tax breaks for alternative energy don't fit with their free-market libertarian ideology.
In a twist, Koch interests held talks more than a year ago with Securing America’s Future Energy, a group focused on reducing American dependence on foreign oil, about making a sizable investment, say two sources familiar with those talks.
SAFE, which was launched in 2006 with major funding from FedEx CEO Fred Smith, never received any Koch money, a spokesperson said.
The group seemed an odd choice for a Koch investment: One of its key priorities is promoting alternative transportation, including electric vehicles.
While the full dimensions of the Mahoney-Drevna initiative aren’t clear, some sources believe there could be some overlap with other advocacy outfits backed by the Koch donor network. “The new organization may be doing work that’s now being done by the Institute for Energy Research,” a Koch-backed think tank, according to one source.
Although IER in recent years has issued several statements and papers attacking electric vehicle subsidies as part of a broad pro-fossil-fuels agenda, the new initiative is expected to expand the focus on electric vehicles and sell its message to a bigger audience through ads to generate more political backing.
Serendipitously, Drevna became a “distinguished senior fellow” at IER last May, after he left his perch running the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers. The month after Drevna came aboard, the think tank posted a new paper attacking subsidies for a leading player in the electric car market: Elon Musk's Tesla Motors.
Above is from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/koch-electric-vehicles_us_56c4d63ce4b0b40245c8cbf6?ir=Green§ion=us_green&utm_hp_ref=green
Wealthy donors drawn to Rubio White House bid after Bush drops out
NEW YORK | By Michelle Conlin and Grant Smith
Within minutes of Jeb Bush dropping out of the presidential race Saturday night, some of his donors were preparing to throw their financial support behind Marco Rubio, who has emerged as the strongest candidate among the establishment wing of the party.
"Jeb's network is already naturally migrating to Marco," said Gaylord Hughey, a top Bush fundraiser from Texas, echoing what four other top donors told Reuters. "It's the clear path."
"It's a stampede," added another donor, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he wanted to give Bush some time after dropping out before he went public with his support of Rubio, the U.S. senator from Florida.
Three other Bush donors, who declined to be named, also said they now planned to support Rubio.
Although he has failed to win any of the first three nominating contests, Rubio is considered by many political strategists as the best positioned to challenge frontrunner Donald Trump, a billionaire political outsider, and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, who has campaigned on an anti-Washington message.
The likelihood that some of Bush's deep-pocketed donors will back Rubio comes at an opportune time for his candidacy, as he heads into a series of contests in March that will be crucial for building momentum.
Brian Ballard, who raised money for Bush last year but switched allegiances last summer to Rubio, said: "It's flooding tonight. Ninety-five percent of Jeb's money is going to end up with Marco."
Rubio had only $5 million in cash on hand at the end of January, federal campaign finance reports released Saturday night show, a slim buffer by modern campaign standards.
Conservative Solutions, a political spending group that supports his campaign, had $5.6 million on hand at the end of January, but spent an additional $9.3 million on advertising in the first 19 days of February.
By contrast, Right to Rise, Bush's political spending group, had $24.5 million on hand at the end of January but spent $6.6 million of that in February on ads. And his network of donors have proven their financial might, helping Bush at one point to amass a war chest of $150 million.
Even before Bush dropped out, some donors privately complained about the missteps of the campaign, expressing concern about the strength of Trump's candidacy and Bush's lackluster debate performances.
In January, a dozen top Bush donors interviewed by Reuters said they were angry that Bush was using their money to lob attack ads at Rubio, damaging the candidate they thought had the best chance to win.
They also said they had privately signaled to the Rubio campaign that they would support him once Bush dropped out. But they wouldn't go public at the time because they feared displeasing the Bush dynasty.
In addition to the Bush money, Rubio is expected to reap the support of the billionaire industrialist Koch brothers and their donor network, which is expected to spend $400 million in the presidential race, according to several network donors and Koch political organization officials.
The Koch brothers are also in the midst of planning efforts to undercut Trump's candidacy, network officials and members said at a recent private retreat in California.
Their focus group research has shown that when voters learn more about how Trump's past business behavior has hurt ordinary people, they sour on him, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
(Reporting By Michelle Conlin; Editing by Paul Thomasch and Mary Milliken)
Above is from: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-rubio-idUSMTZSAPEC2LVTX679
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)