Democrats' criminal-justice lies are as awful as the Biden coverup
Last week, former President Joe Biden disclosed his inexplicably 'undetected' aggressive cancer as bombshell revelations detailed how the White House covered up his crumbling health — enabled by a media establishment that hid the uncomfortable truth.
Americans are outraged that supposedly trustworthy institutions lied about facts we needed to choose a president.
We should be equally furious at the lies that officials and the progressive press have told us about public safety and 'justice reform' laws built on false narratives.
Advertisement
'Our criminal justice system must be focused on redemption and rehabilitation,' Biden asserted during his 2020 presidential campaign.
He pledged to 'reduce the number of people incarcerated' and, fantastically, to 'root out the racial, gender, and income-based disparities in the system' — ideals that New York Democrats also followed.
Advertisement
The words are as empty as the assurances of Biden's fitness were.
In truth, about 35% of serious offenders are re-arrested within a year of prison release, with 85% re-arrested over a decade.
No wonder reforms that replaced criminal consequences with social services boosted crime and reduced accountability.
Tragically, when our government hides such truths, innocent people get hurt.
Advertisement
In 2023, for example, when Tyresse Minter was paroled early to the Bronx home of his wife Karen, the family was not warned that even while incarcerated (for pistol-whipping a man and then shooting him three times in the back), Minter had been disciplined for violent conduct and possessing a weapon.
Karen was further lulled by the parenting and anger-management classes mandated for Minter by Family Court, led to believe that enrollment equaled rehabilitation.
One month after she took Minter in, he fatally strangled Karen's 15-year-old son, Corde Scott.
'He was paroled to my home,' Karen told me.
Advertisement
'So, they thought it was safe . . . Safe for who? He killed Corde.'
New York's 2019 bail 'reform' law similarly refused to grapple with dangerousness — based on narratives about 'mass incarceration' and 'systemic racism.'
Judges now are barred from setting bail for hundreds of offenses, forcing them to release even defendants who pose a clear threat to public safety.
No wonder New Yorkers continue to feel unsafe in the subways, despite increased police presence: They no longer trust a criminal justice system that literally can't detain a violent psycho after he's committed an assault and swears to commit more.
New York's discovery 'reform,' also built on baloney narratives about over-incarceration and race, forced prosecutors to simply decline or dismiss tens of thousands of cases rather than convict guilty criminals.
Of course Gotham's pharmacies are locking up more and more products: They rightly don't trust the justice system to keep recidivists out of their shampoo aisles.
Statewide 'Raise the Age' is perhaps the most appallingly deceitful 'reform' of all, because it endangers kids.
Advertisement
By removing criminal consequences for 16- and 17-year-olds, even when they commit repeated acts of violence, the law forces NYC teens to live in fear of their peers — a reality only worsened by 'Raise the Lower Age,' which prevents officers from taking kids under age 12 into custody at all.
Juvenile probation and youth officers lament that more kids are bringing knives and guns to school because they correctly do not trust the system to protect them from dangerous classmates.
By continually forgiving teen violence and burying case records, the laws have actually empowered violent youths to be more violent.
In the last half-decade, NYC youth arrests surged up 68%, and youth victimization jumped 71%.
Advertisement
Nor can the city's vulnerable children trust the Administration for Children's Services to keep dangerous parents from harming them.
Fallacious narratives about racial disparity and the stigma of criminal investigations lead ACS to channel 70% of neglect and abuse cases toward social service responses — not actual investigations.
At least seven children have died in the past year under caseworkers' unserious 'supervision.'
ACS has shown itself to be so untrustworthy that the city Department of Investigations is pushing for license to review at least a dozen recent child-harm cases.
Advertisement
Clearly, DOI doesn't trust the agency to decide which abuse claims are 'unfounded.'
To regain trust in our institutions, New Yorkers must bring back mechanisms that force agencies to 'show us the receipts' when it comes to dangerous criminals.
That means revising the bail law to permit judges to consider dangerousness in detaining offenders pre-trial, and amending the discovery law (beyond the recent tweaks) to ensure all cases with merit can be robustly prosecuted.
Advertisement
We must fix 'Raise the Age' and 'Raise the Lower Age' to re-establish real criminal consequences for youth violence — and to disclose statistics on young offenders.
And ACS should return to actually investigating abusive parents.
It's up to citizens to demand institutional honesty by pushing for policies based on truth, not pretty lies about redemption and race.
Hannah E. Meyers is a fellow and the director of policing and public safety at the Manhattan Institute.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
23 minutes ago
- New York Post
Democrats made themselves toxic — now they're addicted to their own poison
A few Democratic officeholders, activists and pundits are finally coming to their senses that their brand is toxic to a majority of the American people. The Biden administration killed what was left of it in a number of ways. First, it serially lied to Americans about the cognitive decline and cancerous condition of President Joe Biden, both while in and after office. Advertisement Only when caught did the complicit media 'fess up that the Biden inner circle serially misled the American people about Biden's inability to fulfill the duties of the presidency. Second, left-wing politicos used Biden as a waxen effigy. His job was to pose as a 'moderate' cover to push through the most radical and unpopular agenda in the last half-century. Advertisement Only that way could 'Old Joe Biden from Scranton' and his backroom handlers ram down the throat of the American people unpopular policies that nearly wrecked the country. Third, without either a functional president or viable initiatives, the new hard-left Democrats sought to brand Donald Trump as 'Hitler' and half the country who supported him as 'fascists.' For nearly nine years, the Democrats launched one failed hoax after another on the American people: 'Russian collusion,' 'laptop disinformation,' and the lying so-called '51 intelligence authorities.' They proved quite willing to undermine the rule of law by manipulating the court system in efforts to destroy their bogeyman, Trump. Advertisement The people are finally tired of all the potty-mouthed Democrat videos, the congressional stunts and meltdowns, the pampered rich kids rioting on elite campuses, the knee-jerk obsessions with racial slurs, the firebombing of Tesla dealerships, the romanticization of left-wing political murderers — and always the adolescent tantrums over Trump. The Democrats had mostly given up on democracy some 13 years ago. That was the last time they transparently and democratically nominated Barack Obama a second time as their presidential candidate. Ever since, their nominations have been rigged. In 2020, party insiders — terrified of the left-wing crazy primary field — forced out all the leading contenders. Advertisement Then they coronated the debilitated but still supposedly useful moderate Biden as their COVID-era candidate. Biden bragged that he would pick his vice president on the basis of race and gender. What followed was the most bizarre campaign in history. Biden stayed put in his basement and outsourced his candidacy to the partisan media. Next, in 2024, they forced the now no longer useful Biden off the ticket, nullifying his 14 million primary voters. Then, without a vote, they rammed in inept Vice President Kamala Harris as the nominee. As a failed candidate in 2020, she had never won a single delegate. Some in the party now concede it must roust out its radicals. But Democrats will not. AOC and her Squad, the unhinged Jasmine Crockets of the party, and the ossified socialist Bernie Bros would demonize any Democrat who offered a sane reboot. Advertisement A few fossils in the party may think they know how to save it. But they are terrified that the medicine would be considered far worse than the illness that prompted it. Would Democrats consider embracing measured and legal-only immigration? No — the crazy base would scream 'xenophobe!' A return to meritocracy and the Martin Luther King notion of race as incidental, not essential, to who we are? Advertisement That would be called 'racist.' Maybe reforms to fix failed schools with vouchers, school choice and charter schools? Again, 'racist!' How about developing gas and oil reserves and nuclear power to lower energy costs for the struggling middle class? Advertisement That would be condemned as 'destroying the planet.' Restore police forces, end critical race and legal theory, and deter criminals with tough sentencing? How about ceasing the whiny fixations with 'white privilege' and 'white rage?' Or quit seeing a 'white supremacist' under every bed? Advertisement Again and again, 'racist!' The left created DEI — the use of race to adjudicate every political issue. And like any addictive, toxic drug, they now can neither survive with DEI — nor without it. Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate rankings: The 5 seats most likely to flip
The 2026 midterm cycle is already bustling with activity as Senate Republicans gear up to defend their majority and Democrats try to reverse course from a difficult few years and chart a path forward. The fields are starting to take shape as incumbents decide whether to run again, candidates launch campaigns and party leaders attempt to woo their top choices. It's all happening against the backdrop of constant action at the White House and Congress' push to enact President Trump's massive tax bill — both of which will play outsize roles in the coming cycle. Here's an early look at the five Senate seats most likely to flip next year. Sen. Jon Ossoff (Ga.) is considered the most vulnerable Democrat on the Senate map and Republicans have eagerly been awaiting the chance to win back the seat. But they were barely a quarter of the way into the cycle when Republicans got their first big piece of bad recruitment news: Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) decided against a Senate bid, depriving the GOP of its top choice across the entire 2026 map. His decision scrambled the race. Not only did it deprive the GOP of a top-tier candidate in a crucial race, it also increases the chances of a bloody primary. 'Kemp is the 1:1 on the board. Full stop,' one GOP operative said. 'This is a situation where you want a primary. Where you want them to show their mettle because I just don't think that we have a clear enough indication on any of these guys to say they can do it.' Multiple Republicans indicated they expect a primary much like what happened in Ohio last year: a crowded field of B-tier candidates, many of whom will prompt more questions than answers. The field is already starting to take shape. Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) is in, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) is out and operatives believe Rep. Mike Collins (R-Ga.) may follow Carter into the primary. More are likely to go for it, but none that are considered heavy hitters at this stage. Top party figures have been hoping for freshman Rep. Brian Jack (R-Ga.) to take the plunge, but few expect him to do so. There have also been murmurs around Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins and Small Business Administrator Kelly Loeffler — but nothing more. Republicans concede Ossoff will be to beat without Kemp, pointing to his growing war chest, battle-tested history and penchant for avoiding missteps during his term. GOP operatives, though, see openings to whack him over support for transgender women in sports and steadfast opposition to Trump. 'I am bullish on Jon Ossoff. … He's done a great job. He's centered the people of Georgia and their needs and their concerns,' Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) told The Hill, arguing that the GOP's 'one big, beautiful bill' will be an albatross at the ballot box. 'I'd hate to have to run as a Republican in this moment,' he added. If Democrats are going to make any headway toward winning back the majority, toppling Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) is a must. And for now, they are waiting to find out whether Gov. Roy Cooper (D) is in or out for what would be the marquee matchup on the board. Much like Kemp in Georgia, Cooper is a popular two-term governor who would easily give his party the best chance of flipping a seat and avoiding a messy primary. Democrats are hopeful that Cooper will not follow the lead of numerous governors over the past decade who have spurned bids for the upper chamber. 'They've got to convince him that serving in the Senate is better than spending time with his family,' one Democratic operative with North Carolina ties said of party leaders. 'That's a hard sell.' Rep. Wiley Nickel (D-N.C.) has already announced a bid. Whoever the Democratic nominee is will have to face an incumbent Republican who has twice won close contests. But for Tillis, squaring off against a popular governor in a year when the mood of the country might not be in the GOP's corner would likely make it his toughest political bout yet. Adding to his issues is potential GOP primary as some conservatives continue to cry foul over his work with Democrats in recent years. But Republicans remain confident as the state's rightward tilt stayed true in November. Governors past and present also have found that running for the upper chamber is a different animal, potentially giving Tillis another boost. Does anyone want to face off with Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) next year? That's the question on the minds of top politicos as Democrats struggle to find a viable candidate against the Maine centrist after the party failed spectacularly to defeat her in 2020, leaving them burned in the New England state heading into next year. The latest blow came as Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) announced he will run for his toss-up House seat once again rather than mount a statewide bid. That's leaving Democrats to pin their hopes on Maine Gov. Janet Mills (D) throwing her hat in the ring — but Mills hasn't sounded overly enthusiastic about a potential bid. 'I'm not planning to do anything right now, I'm just — I'm not planning to run for anything,' Mills told a local outlet in late April. 'Things change week to week, month to month, but I'm not … at this moment, I'm not planning to run for another office.' The reticence comes after Sara Gideon vastly outraised and outspent the five-term senator in 2020, only to see her polling advantage evaporate come election day. Collins won by eight percentage points, owing in large part to her long-standing connections to the state. 'In general, for any senator who's served their state and been out there and talking to the voters and engaging them and working to solve those problems, they're going to be effective with their voters to gain their support,' said Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), who ran the Democratic Senatorial Committee during the 2020 cycle. 'From what I have seen from so many of my colleagues and Republican colleagues, that's the winning combination,' she added. Nevertheless, Maine remains a blue state and the last one to not change parties as part of the realignment that finally saw Montana and West Virginia fall into GOP hands last year. This and some troublesome polls are keeping that glimmer of hope alive for some Democrats. One Democratic operative made clear to The Hill that there remains donor interest in playing ball —- but only if a 'legit candidate' takes the plunge. It's not even halfway through the off-year and the Michigan Democratic primary is already the leader in the clubhouse to become the most contentious of the 2026 cycle as a trio of key players look to succeed retiring Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) in the Wolverine State. Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.), former health director Abdul El-Sayed, state Sen. Mallory McMorrow (D) and former Michigan state House Speaker Joe Tate have all launched bids in recent months. Stevens, the favorite of Washington Democrats, is the initial leader with 34 percent, according to a new survey released last week. That's a 12-point advantage over El-Sayed, who has Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-Vt.) backing. But the presence of the two is giving Democrats agita over what is becoming a proxy battle between the party establishment and progressive forces, with that battle stretching into one over Israel and Palestine. 'It's basically a [Hillary Clinton] versus Bernie type fight,' said one Democratic operative with Michigan ties. As for McMorrow, she is the dark horse. The state senator, who has seen her star rise in recent years, is pitching herself as part of a new generation of Democrats, having said she will not back Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) for his current post. She is also using the Pete Buttigieg playbook of flooding the zone media wise. Democrats maintain they are unconcerned with a testy primary and believe it will be a net-positive come general election time. 'I've never been opposed to primaries when I was [DSCC] chair,' said Peters, who chaired the committee in both 2022 and 2024. 'A primary can be constructive. … I would hope they wouldn't cross the line and attack each other, although that's always sometimes difficult. But … a primary can really strengthen a candidate before they get into the real show.' Across the aisle, former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) is once again the party's top choice to become its nominee. But unlike his 2024 run, he might have a primary on his hands as Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-Mich.) is moving closer to running. Of course, winning in the state will be difficult for any Republican. Michigan has not elected a Republican to the Senate in more than 30 years. New Hampshire is considered a must-win state for Democrats in 2026. And they are breathing easy despite Sen. Jeanne Shaheen's (D-N.H.) retirement as Rep. Chris Pappas' (D-N.H.) presence gives the party a top-tier candidate. Shaheen, a three-term lawmaker and ex-New Hampshire governor, has been a formidable force in the state's political scene for years and is set to leave a major void in the Democratic-leaning state. However, Democrats remain bullish that the seat will remain in the party's hands. Of all the states on this list, New Hampshire is the only one former Vice President Kamala Harris carried last year. It is also the only one, other than Georgia, that is unlikely to have a knock-out, drag out Democratic primary that could prove damaging in a general election. The major questions reside on the Republican side as former Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) is eyeing a second run in the Granite state 12 years after he narrowly lost to Shaheen. According to a source familiar with the ex-senator, Brown is continuing to take a 'hard look' at a bid and has been traveling around the state, attending party events and doing his 'due diligence.' He also was spotted on Capitol Hill making the rounds in March. A decision is expected by early fall. Brown was dogged in his 2014 run over accusations that he was a carpetbagger, having run two years prior for reelection in Massachusetts. Republicans are widely expecting that attack once again, especially in contrast to the Pappas family's longstanding ties to the state. 'The problem is the Pappas family is New Hampshire,' the GOP operative said. What isn't clear is what the GOP's fallback options are in a state where they likely need everything to break right to have a chance. No Republican has nabbed a Senate seat in the state in 15 years, though the party has held the governorship since 2017. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Chicago Tribune
43 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Illinois lawmakers pass budget with tax hikes on tobacco, gambling — but adjourn without transit, Bears stadium
SPRINGFIELD — Democratic state lawmakers voted late Saturday, just minutes before their midnight deadline, to send Gov. JB Pritzker the final piece of a $55 billion budget balanced with a combination of spending cuts and an estimated $800 million plus in tax increases, including hikes on tobacco products, vaping and online sportsbooks. The governor's office touted the spending plan as Pritzker's 'seventh consecutive balanced budget that continues to get the state's finances back on track.' The General Assembly adjourned its spring session without passing legislation to address the $771 million fiscal shortfall faced by Chicago-area mass transit, and also took no action on proposals to help the Bears relocate to a new stadium in the northwest suburbs. The session's final hours were marked by a rush to pass the budget and revenue package before June 1, when the required vote threshold rose to a three-fifths majority. Ultimately, House Democrats approved the three main components of the plan by that margin or greater. The $55.2 billion spending portion of the budget passed the House by a 75-41 margin, with two Democrats — Reps. Larry Walsh of Elwood and Stephanie Kifowit of Aurora — joining Republicans in opposition. A short time later, the Senate approved the measure on a 34-23 vote, two votes shy of what would have been needed after midnight. Four downstate and suburban Senate Democrats voted against the spending plan: Sens. Christopher Belt of Swansea, Suzy Glowiak Hilton of Western Springs, Mike Halpin of Rock Island and Doris Turner of Springfield. During the House debate, Rep. Dagmara Avelar, a Democrat from Bolingbrook and member of the legislative Latino Caucus, said she was supporting the plan even though it was 'not a perfect budget,' noting her opposition to the elimination of funding for a Medicaid-style program for noncitizens aged 42 through 64. 'In fact, it's painful. It eliminates a program that has been a lifeline for many, including people that I have fought alongside for years,' she said. 'But I'm voting 'yes' because leadership requires hard choices. And this budget protects more than it cuts.' Majority Leader Robyn Gabel of Evanston, the chief budget negotiator in the House, said the budget made $400 million in spending cuts, including $193 million in operational cuts across state agencies. A big reason for those reductions, she said, was the uncertainty over whether Republican President Donald Trump's administration would deprive Illinois of critical federal funding for Medicaid and in other areas. 'I want to emphasize that these were not decisions made lightly or made hastily. These are strategic efficiencies so we can invest in the needs of our working families and seniors on fixed incomes,' Gabel said. 'Of course, we do not know the full extent of the cuts Washington is preparing. But we do anticipate that health care access and infrastructure will be most directly impacted.' Pritzker also took shot at Trump in his post-budget statement. 'Even in the face of Trump and Congressional Republicans stalling the national economy, our state budget delivers for working families without raising their taxes while protecting the progress we are making for our long-term fiscal health,' Pritzker said in a statement. Illinois House passes bill allowing terminally ill people to end their lives with physician's helpRepublicans criticized what they called a bloated budget and said the Democrats' attempts to lay blame on Trump Republicans in Washington are misguided. 'The tax-and-spend Democrats … are so unfamiliar with cost-cutting, they call it chaos,' said GOP Rep. William Hauter of Morton. 'They wasted billions. And they are prepared to waste billions more. Wake up, Illinois. Vote 'no.'' Pointing to the $40 billion budget approved after Pritzker first took office in 2019 and last year's roughly $53 billion plan, Sen. Chapin Rose of Mahomet, a GOP budget negotiator, said Democrats must shoulder the blame for the state's fiscal issues. 'Let's be clear: $15 billion over six years, that's on you,' Rose said. '$2 billion increase over last year, that's on you. Billions of dollars in tax increases that are driving working families out of Illinois, that's on you.' Senate Republican leader John Curran of Downers Grove faulted Democrats for once again pushing their budget package through in the final hours of the legislature's spring session without sufficient time for review, particularly on the tax side of the ledger. Democrats 'introduced a bill, $880 million in tax increases, we were told — nearly $1 billion — and six short hours from introduction of what it was to passing in both the House and the Senate,' Curran said. 'That's not transparent. That's not being upfront with the people of Illinois.' Sen. Elgie Sims, Democrats' budget point person in the Senate, said, however, that the plan largely reflected what lawmakers had been discussing since Pritzker laid out his proposal in February. 'If there's one thing I do agree about with the other side of the aisle, it is that a budget is a statement of our priorities,' Sims said. 'And our priorities are being fiscally responsible, preparing for the future and facing the challenges that are coming our way head on.' Heeding Pritzker's warning that he would veto a plan that relied on increases to the state's sales or income taxes, legislators approved a package that would employ one-time tactics, such as an amnesty for delinquent tax filers. The revenue package also included increased taxes on tobacco products to 45% of the wholesale price. Starting in July, that higher tax will also apply to nicotine pouches, which have exploded in popularity in recent years, and e-cigarettes would be taxed at the same rate as other tobacco products for the first time. The revenue would go to tobacco health initiatives and the state's Medicaid program. Democrats also approved a new per-wager tax on online sportsbooks, which would generate an estimated $36 million. Overall, the spending and tax package would result in a slight surplus, Democrats said. Amid the late push to approve a tax-and-spending plan, the Senate also narrowly approved a proposal to overhaul governance and increase funding for Chicago-area mass transit. The plan included a $1.50 fee on retail deliveries, which replaced an earlier proposal to increase tolls on Chicago-area toll roads. But the House adjourned without taking up the measure, meaning the transit issue remains unresolved. A late push for legislation to aid the Chicago Bears with the team's proposed move to a new stadium in Arlington Heights failed to come to a vote in either chamber. The spending package Democrats approved stuck closely to the broad outlines Pritzker presented to lawmakers in February. However, with revenue projections for the budget year that begins July 1 dimming in the months since the governor made his proposal, legislators approved some new ideas to bring in more money, including changes that would allow Illinois to tax offshore and out-of-state corporate profits. One new funding stream would come from taxing 'large transnational corporations' that store assets overseas, Democratic Rep. Will Guzzardi of Chicago said. 'Those are the revenue sources we're contemplating to balance a budget that supports investments in children and families and seniors and people with disabilities,' he said. The budget package included a tax amnesty program aimed at boosting revenue that was part of Pritzker's proposal. The program is expected to bring in $228 million, Guzzardi said, which is $30 million above Pritzker's initial estimate. The spending proposal lawmakers approved, negotiated among the Democratic House and Senate leaders and the governor's office, deviates from Pritzker's original plan in certain areas, including funding for elementary and secondary education. Pritzker proposed a $350 million increase as required under a 2017 school funding overhaul. But the final plan would boost funding by only $307 million over the current year, cutting $43 million that normally would go to a grant program designed to help school districts with high property tax rates and low real estate values. The grant program was paused to provide 'the ability for us to have a study that talks about the efficacy of that program, making sure it is having the desired impact and reducing property taxes for hardworking homeowners across the state,' Sims said. Democrats managed to gather enough support for their plan despite ongoing tension over the elimination of funding for the health insurance program covering noncitizens ages 42 to 64. When Pritzker proposed the cut in February, his office estimated it would save the state about $330 million from its general fund. The approved budget would preserve the portion of the program for those 65 and older, allocating $110 million for their coverage. Eliminating funding for the younger group, which would end coverage for more than 30,000 residents, was unpopular among Latino lawmakers and progressives, but those blocs didn't end up withholding their votes from the final budget package. Democratic Rep. Lilian Jiménez, one of the champions of the program, stressed the importance of making sure the health care networks in low-income communities that are often used by immigrants are adequately funded in the face of the cut. 'What we're trying to do is make sure that those communities have the resources they need to brace for the impact of having 30,000 uninsured throughout the state of Illinois,' said Jiménez, whose district includes heavily Latino portions of Chicago. While many immigrants living in Illinois without authorization pay state and federal taxes that support the program and other services for which they are ineligible because of their citizenship status, a state audit released in February found that over three years the insurance program for older immigrants cost nearly double what was expected. The budget would eliminate funding for a relatively new state program providing free test preparation to students at public universities and some community colleges, launched in late February after receiving $10 million in the current state budget. Supporters said in early May that the program had already saved more than 200,000 students a total of roughly $8 million in just two months. When Illinois launched the program, it became the first state to offer free comprehensive test preparation for college students. Democrats also followed Pritzker's recommendation to pause one of his key priorities: a $75 million annual increase to boost the number of seats in state-funded preschool programs. The budget would keep that spending level with the current overall plan also would cut back on another Pritzker priority, suspending monthly contributions to the state's 'rainy day' fund for a year. Instead, about $45 million would be held in the general fund. At the same time, some lawmakers pushed to boost funding for health facilities that serve low-income patients and communities, asking for $160 million for safety-net hospitals, though settling in the end for $118 million. 'There are significant increases, investments in our hospital systems. Our safety-net hospitals are on the front lines,' Sims said. 'They are caring for our most vulnerable. And we are making sure that we made investments in those safety-net hospitals because they carry a large volume of Medicaid clients. So, we want to make sure they have the resources necessary to be successful.' The Democratic plan also included an 80-cent-per-hour wage increase for direct support professionals who work with people with developmental disabilities, but reduces the hours the state would pay for by 35%, which Gabel, the House majority leader, characterized as 'rightsizing.' Advocates and unions have said wages needed to be raised by $2 an hour to meet recommendations that those workers be paid 150% of minimum wage. At a Senate committee hearing on the plan Saturday afternoon, Rose, the Mahomet Republican, said the reduction in hours was a 'cynical sleight of hand.' Republicans also criticized the use of one-time revenue streams to fill shortfalls, including the diversion of money from road projects by again delaying a shift of revenue from the sales tax on gasoline from the state's general fund to the road fund, freeing up $171 million to spend on operations. 'Last year … we described that as a one-time, special occurrence. Now, we're doing it again,' Republican Rep. Ryan Spain of Peoria said during a Friday night House committee hearing. 'What happened to the one time occurrence?' 'We're in difficult times,' Gabel said. 'This is a hard budget. We felt like we needed to do it one more time.' Both Republicans and Democrats pointed to the uncertain federal funding picture, with Republicans questioning spending in a 'doomsday budget' and Democrats blaming Trump for creating confusion for states. Gabel said 'this budget is based on the information we have at this time.' Despite the fiscal challenges the state faces, the Democratic plan included $8.2 billion in new spending on infrastructure projects, which are separate from the operating budget and funded by dedicated taxes and borrowing. Republicans accused the majority party of once again hoarding that money for projects in their own districts.'Let's hide this stuff. Let's hide it so that the public doesn't see it until it's too late. Let's blame everybody but ourselves. The Trump administration did this. The Trump administration did that. I call B.S.,' GOP Rep. John Cabello of Machesney Park, who was a Trump delegate during last year's Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, said during the House debate late Saturday. 'Start looking at these pages, people. There is so much pork in here,' C, lamenting that Republicans weren't given a chance to fund projects on behalf of taxpayers in their districts. While House and Senate Democrats dodged Republican questions about the so-called pork-barrel spending, their legislation included funding for a number of large projects in Democratic districts. For instance, Proviso Township High School District 209, which is in House Speaker Emanuel 'Chris' Welch's district and where he previously was school board president, would receive $40 million for 'costs associated with capital improvements and an outdoor sports complex at Proviso West High School.' Members of the GOP also criticized proposed pay raises of about 5% — to a base salary of $98,304 — for lawmakers, though in the past they've largely accepted the pay increases even when voting against the budget. The raises are cost-of-living adjustments included in state law, though past legislatures have voted to freeze their own pay — a move that has drawn legal challenges. The plan includes similar increases for the governor, other statewide elected officials and the heads of state agencies. Pritzker, a billionaire Hyatt Hotels heir, does not take a state salary. The Senate-approved plan to address a looming $771 million fiscal cliff for the Chicago area's mass transit system and to overhaul the system's disjointed board structure moved away from a proposed increase on Chicago-area toll roads in favor of a new $1.50 fee on retail deliveries. That came after labor groups and suburban officials criticized the proposed toll increase. The so-called 'climate impact fee,' which also was introduced late Saturday just hours before winning approval in the Senate, would kick in on Jan. 1 and could increase with inflation in future years. It would be imposed for each order, regardless of the number of items, but would not apply 'to the delivery of groceries and prescription and non-prescription drugs and medications.' Retailers with total sales of $500,000 or less in the preceding calendar year would also be exempt. Even before the proposal was officially filed, the fee had drawn opposition from business groups, including the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce, Illinois Chamber of Commerce, the manufacturers', restaurant and retail associations, and the big-tech interest group TechNet. 'This new, regressive tax will undermine consumer savings from the recent elimination of the grocery tax and would disproportionately impact communities that rely on delivery services to receive vital items,' the groups said in a statement.
