Latest news with #DonHarmon
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Spring session entering final day as budget deadline looms
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (WGN) – We're finally getting a look at state lawmakers' $55 billion budget plan with just over 24 hours left in the legislative session. On the second to last day of session, the three most powerful men in Springfield met behind closed doors. Talks between Senate President Don Harmon (D-Oak Park), House Speaker Emanuel 'Chris' Welch (D-Westchester), and Gov. JB Pritzker (D-Illinois) led to the release of a 3,300-page appropriations bill that adds $1 billion in new revenue, though it holds the line on individual and corporate income taxes. Illinois budget battle: What Chicago needs from Springfield 'We've got $1 billion in revenue for this budget in the area of tax collection, for those who have not paid their taxes as well as those who've made choices in terms of gaming and other – tobacco use and gaming,' Sen. Elgie Sims (D-Chicago) said. Despite having major submajorities in both chambers, Democrats wrestled with a bleak financial picture. Revenue growth did not meet estimates used to draft Pritzker's budget blueprint. 'This budget includes significant investments in our priorities, education, health care, protecting our most vulnerable,' Sims said. Democrats are asking their members to pass the $55 billion spending plan despite uncertainty about federal funding. Lawmakers, groups rally against Medicaid cuts as state budget deadline looms 'It's a tough year. We know instability in Washington, D.C. makes it worse,' Rep. Kam Buckner (D-Chicago) said. 'We know there are some real pressures here in the state in trying to bring forth a budget that meets the needs of everybody was a tough one. So this was tough. This has been the toughest budget year since I've been here.' After months of warning from Chicagoland transit that bus and train service might be cut without a state bailout, lawmakers are working to hike the cost of tolls and rideshares to help the system. READ: Illinois has a $770M hole in the transit budget that could leave commuters stranded There's also legislation moving to create a new oversight agency. 'I want to remind folks that when we're talking about CTA, Metra, Pace, this is a statewide transit overhaul,' Buckner said. House Republican Leader Tony McCombie (R-Savanna) suggests some of her members might support the transit reforms. 'We saw the governance piece and I think we could probably get some bipartisan support on that,' McCombie said. 'The funding source is what kind of scares all of us, because what is that going to look like?' Read more: Latest Chicago news and headlines Democrats expect to meet the budget deadline, but the transit legislation might be broken up into pieces or may not even pass at all on Saturday. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Illinois lawmakers' latest perk — continuing education credits for going to work
State legislators who are also lawyers in Illinois are getting a new perk, courtesy of the state Supreme Court. They just need to show up for work in the Illinois General Assembly and they'll be able to collect credit toward satisfying continuing education classes required to keep their law licenses in good standing. The new benefit came about from a little-noticed change in Supreme Court rules, a move encouraged and endorsed by multiple lawmakers. It took effect Jan. 1, just in time for the ongoing spring legislative session. At least 29 lawmakers were notified that they could qualify for up to 12 of the 30 educational credits they need to collect over two years. The lawmaker-lawyers can chalk up three hours of credit by simply attending one day of a legislative session, a committee meeting or a subcommittee hearing, according to the new rule. One catch is that they can collect only three credits throughout a legislative session, such as a spring session that lasts several months or a fall veto session that lasts a few weeks, court officials said. While many current lawmakers — notably House Speaker Emanuel 'Chris' Welch, Senate President Don Harmon and Senate Minority Leader John Curran, all three of whom are lawyers — not surprisingly support the new benefit, some former legislators and state legal experts said the benefit for a select few of the state's nearly 86,000 active lawyers raises questions about why members of the General Assembly get the special break. They and others also said it smacked of favoritism from a Supreme Court whose budget relies on lawmakers' approval. 'It does sort of seem like special treatment for a select group of people,' said Kent Slater, who formerly served as a House Republican and as a state appellate court justice. It 'looks like the Supreme Court is trying to make friends with the legislature.' Illinois lawmakers over the years have amassed or worked to collect a wide array of benefits for themselves, including pension sweeteners and salary bonuses for higher-ranking lawmakers. For more than a century, they were able to distribute legislative scholarships, before the program was killed after news stories detailed tuition waivers at state universities for relatives, political cronies and campaign donors. In the 1980s, one legislator even advanced a bill that would have allowed lawmakers who served 10 years in the General Assembly to practice law without going to law school if they passed the bar exam. That idea rose quickly but fizzled fast once the public heard about it. Yet the timing for this latest perk is inopportune, as it comes when Gov. JB Pritzker and his fellow Democrats who control supermajorities in both chambers are showing little interest in implementing any sweeping good-government reforms — even following former Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan's federal corruption conviction earlier this year. Elizabeth Grossman, executive director of Common Cause Illinois, said the idea that lawmakers are now getting another break 'rather than passing meaningful reform that will make the legislature more responsive to the people of Illinois shows us where their priorities are.' But state Rep. Terra Costa Howard, a lawyer and Democrat from Glen Ellyn, said she pushed for the credits because she saw a need. Though she could benefit from the new rule, Costa Howard said acquiring required educational hours 'really isn't hard' for her personally because she already gets significant annual training. But her colleagues, she said, often are in a quandary trying to find time to complete their educational hours while they are busy making laws during crunch time in Springfield. Costa Howard said she reached out to various legal sources, including Illinois Supreme Court Justice Mary Kay O'Brien, a former House Democrat who represents the lawmaker's region on the high court. 'I sort of just took the bull by the horns and went for it,' Costa Howard said. No doubt, lawmakers can learn something about state laws if they pay attention to debates, ask questions and discuss the legal issues as part of the General Assembly. Because their job, which is technically part-time, also requires them to vote on proposed state laws, they also have an argument that attending legislative hearings could qualify for continuing education credit hours. 'The work that we do as legislators is actually continuing legal education each and every day,' said Costa Howard, who served six years on a House judiciary panel. 'The legislation that you are working on, really going through, has to do 100% with the practice of law. You're looking at statutes, how they are read and interpreted, and it's what we do all the time.' The new rules went into effect at the start of the year but in March the Illinois Supreme Court's Minimum Continuing Legal Education Board sent a reminder to legislators explaining, for example, how a House lawmaker who is a lawyer can receive the credit by sending in a copy of a 'Quorum Roll Call,' the official House record that keeps track of who punched their attendance button for a particular legislative day. A similar process was explained for senators. A video link was even provided to help lawmakers figure out how to get their 'non-traditional' credit. 'You will earn three hours of general MCLE credit by attending at least one day of one qualifying legislative session,' the video said. How much credit lawmakers should receive is another issue getting attention. 'If it adds up to 12 hours, that's quite a bit,' said Ann Lousin, a professor at the University of Illinois Chicago's law school who worked as a researcher at the 1970 Illinois Constitutional Convention. In comparison, she said, she might get 15 credit hours for writing a substantial law review article or a book on legal issues. Steven Lubet, a professor emeritus at Northwestern University's law school and an expert on legal ethics, called the credit for lawmakers 'remarkable.' 'It is especially weird because full-time law teachers do not obtain credit for teaching law school courses, presumably on the theory that MCLE credit requires more than just doing your job,' Lubet wrote in an email. 'I don't see why that same principle wouldn't apply to legislators.' In an interview, Lubet acknowledged he didn't have a 'great problem' with extending credit for legislative hearings that include evidence about why a law should be written but he said that the inconsistency of what counts as credit is 'jarring.' Costa Howard, while saying she has 'utmost respect' for most law professors, maintained that writing and teaching law is very different from lawmakers' interpreting, preparing and explaining bills in Springfield. The decision to give Illinois lawmakers credit raised the number of states that count legislative service toward legal education to at least 24. Before the decision, the nation was split evenly, with 23 states giving credit to lawmakers for their service and 23 that did not, according to research by the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts. Four states didn't require continuing legal education. Eleven states provided a 'full CLE exemption for attorney legislators,' said Supreme Court spokesman Christopher Bonjean. 'The Illinois Supreme Court has been part of a national movement to recognize the educational value of activities outside of traditional coursework. One early example of this is attendance and teaching at bar association meetings,' Bonjean wrote in an emailed response. 'This has gradually expanded to legal scholarship, lawyer-to-lawyer mentoring and service on Supreme Court Boards, Commissions, and Committees. Expansion of limited credit for legislators is a continuation of this, and the Court most recently added a pilot project for CLE credit for providing pro bono legal assistance.' While a legislator could claim three hours of credit if a short committee meeting is the legislator's only committee hearing or full legislative session for the day, it is likely that every lawmaker will have other scheduled legislative days to participate in a full legislative session or committee hearing for at least three hours in either session, according to court officials. Legislative support included a letter co-signed by Welch 'along with more than 30 colleagues from both sides of the aisle asking the Supreme Court to consider recognizing the work legislators do as part of their continuing legal education requirement,' said Jon Maxson, Welch's spokesman. 'Throughout his time as a lawmaker and attorney, the speaker has completed his CLE requirements and will evaluate how this rule can contribute to this requirement going forward.' Similarly, Harmon spokesman John Patterson said the Senate president communicated to court officials his support for the new rule. Patterson said giving the credits to lawmakers has been talked about for many years and Harmon has indicated his support 'in passing conversations over the years.' 'It seems like a reasonable approach,' Patterson said. 'Continuing Legal Education programs are intended to make sure lawyers stay up to date with laws, and that's what lawmakers do on a daily basis during session.' Patterson said it is possible Harmon will tap into the new credits for legislative service, depending on what his overall tally of credits is when it is time for him to report. Curran, the Senate GOP's leader, said he was not sure if he would partake in the opportunity for credit because his law firm uses the Illinois State Bar Association's online offerings for educational purposes, but he said he supports the new rule. 'I thought it was a very appropriate accommodation by the Supreme Court in recognition of just the volume of statutory work we do as legislator lawyers,' Curran said. 'I would put the statutory work I do as a legislator against any CLE (course) that I've ever been a part of.' House Republican Leader Tony McCombie of Savana is not a lawyer. But her predecessor, former Rep. Jim Durkin, a former prosecutor from suburban Cook County, embraced the idea, saying his time spent debating, discussing, crafting and rewriting bills was more valuable than 'watching a CLE program on my laptop.' Giving credit to this select group of lawmakers, of course, raises the issue of whether the same opportunity should be made available to lawyers elected to city councils and village boards — a point Illinois Municipal League CEO Brad Cole said is a 'natural question.' In their own communities, Cole said, 'local officials write the laws too.' Cole said he would monitor how the credit is used by state lawmakers and, if all goes well, look at requesting the credit be expanded to include lawyers elected to local government positions. Asked whether lawyers elected to local posts should receive similar educational credits, Curran said: 'I think they should direct those issues to the court and ask the court to take a review of it.' One question that often arises in Springfield is, once you start expanding a benefit, where do you stop? In the 1980s, Democratic Sen. Frank Savickas of Chicago took advantage of a fast-paced day loaded with mundane bills to win support on a voice vote for an amendment that allowed lawmakers with a decade of service to become lawyers without going to law school. The one caveat was they had to pass the bar exam. Savickas, who was not a lawyer but enjoyed creating mischief, suggested, perhaps tongue-in-cheek, that legislators make laws and should be smart enough to use them professionally. The idea went nowhere once the proposal made headlines, but his move to make veteran lawmakers eligible to practice law became legendary. It even drew admiration from colleagues when the Senate passed a traditional memorial resolution years later upon his death. Even in Springfield, however, the resurrection of the Savickas proposal is unlikely — at least not anytime soon. Costa Howard 'can't imagine' it would pass today. 'Those of us who've actually graduated from law school and taken the bar would take umbrage with that,' she said.
Chicago Tribune
7 days ago
- Politics
- Chicago Tribune
Illinois lawmakers' latest perk — continuing education credits for going to work
State legislators who are also lawyers in Illinois are getting a new perk, courtesy of the state Supreme Court. They just need to show up for work in the Illinois General Assembly and they'll be able to collect credit toward satisfying continuing education classes required to keep their law licenses in good standing. The new benefit came about from a little-noticed change in Supreme Court rules, a move encouraged and endorsed by multiple lawmakers. It took effect Jan. 1, just in time for the ongoing spring legislative session. At least 29 lawmakers were notified that they could qualify for up to 12 of the 30 educational credits they need to collect over two years. The lawmaker-lawyers can chalk up three hours of credit by simply attending one day of a legislative session, a committee meeting or a subcommittee hearing, according to the new rule. One catch is that they can collect only three credits throughout a legislative session, such as a spring session that lasts several months or a fall veto session that lasts a few weeks, court officials said. While many current lawmakers — notably House Speaker Emanuel 'Chris' Welch, Senate President Don Harmon and Senate Minority Leader John Curran, all three of whom are lawyers — not surprisingly support the new benefit, some former legislators and state legal experts said the benefit for a select few of the state's nearly 86,000 active lawyers raises questions about why members of the General Assembly get the special break. They and others also said it smacked of favoritism from a Supreme Court whose budget relies on lawmakers' approval. 'It does sort of seem like special treatment for a select group of people,' said Kent Slater, who formerly served as a House Republican and as a state appellate court justice. It 'looks like the Supreme Court is trying to make friends with the legislature.' Illinois lawmakers over the years have amassed or worked to collect a wide array of benefits for themselves, including pension sweeteners and salary bonuses for higher-ranking lawmakers. For more than a century, they were able to distribute legislative scholarships, before the program was killed after news stories detailed tuition waivers at state universities for relatives, political cronies and campaign donors. In the 1980s, one legislator even advanced a bill that would have allowed lawmakers who served 10 years in the General Assembly to practice law without going to law school if they passed the bar exam. That idea rose quickly but fizzled fast once the public heard about it. Yet the timing for this latest perk is inopportune, as it comes when Gov. JB Pritzker and his fellow Democrats who control supermajorities in both chambers are showing little interest in implementing any sweeping good-government reforms — even following former Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan's federal corruption conviction earlier this year. Elizabeth Grossman, executive director of Common Cause Illinois, said the idea that lawmakers are now getting another break 'rather than passing meaningful reform that will make the legislature more responsive to the people of Illinois shows us where their priorities are.' But state Rep. Terra Costa Howard, a lawyer and Democrat from Glen Ellyn, said she pushed for the credits because she saw a need. Though she could benefit from the new rule, Costa Howard said acquiring required educational hours 'really isn't hard' for her personally because she already gets significant annual training. But her colleagues, she said, often are in a quandary trying to find time to complete their educational hours while they are busy making laws during crunch time in Springfield. Costa Howard said she reached out to various legal sources, including Illinois Supreme Court Justice Mary Kay O'Brien, a former House Democrat who represents the lawmaker's region on the high court. 'I sort of just took the bull by the horns and went for it,' Costa Howard said. No doubt, lawmakers can learn something about state laws if they pay attention to debates, ask questions and discuss the legal issues as part of the General Assembly. Because their job, which is technically part-time, also requires them to vote on proposed state laws, they also have an argument that attending legislative hearings could qualify for continuing education credit hours. 'The work that we do as legislators is actually continuing legal education each and every day,' said Costa Howard, who served six years on a House judiciary panel. 'The legislation that you are working on, really going through, has to do 100% with the practice of law. You're looking at statutes, how they are read and interpreted, and it's what we do all the time.' The new rules went into effect at the start of the year but in March the Illinois Supreme Court's Minimum Continuing Legal Education Board sent a reminder to legislators explaining, for example, how a House lawmaker who is a lawyer can receive the credit by sending in a copy of a 'Quorum Roll Call,' the official House record that keeps track of who punched their attendance button for a particular legislative day. A similar process was explained for senators. A video link was even provided to help lawmakers figure out how to get their 'non-traditional' credit. 'You will earn three hours of general MCLE credit by attending at least one day of one qualifying legislative session,' the video said. How much credit lawmakers should receive is another issue getting attention. 'If it adds up to 12 hours, that's quite a bit,' said Ann Lousin, a professor at the University of Illinois Chicago's law school who worked as a researcher at the 1970 Illinois Constitutional Convention. In comparison, she said, she might get 15 credit hours for writing a substantial law review article or a book on legal issues. Steven Lubet, a professor emeritus at Northwestern University's law school and an expert on legal ethics, called the credit for lawmakers 'remarkable.' 'It is especially weird because full-time law teachers do not obtain credit for teaching law school courses, presumably on the theory that MCLE credit requires more than just doing your job,' Lubet wrote in an email. 'I don't see why that same principle wouldn't apply to legislators.' In an interview, Lubet acknowledged he didn't have a 'great problem' with extending credit for legislative hearings that include evidence about why a law should be written but he said that the inconsistency of what counts as credit is 'jarring.' Costa Howard, while saying she has 'utmost respect' for most law professors, maintained that writing and teaching law is very different from lawmakers' interpreting, preparing and explaining bills in Springfield. The decision to give Illinois lawmakers credit raised the number of states that count legislative service toward legal education to at least 24. Before the decision, the nation was split evenly, with 23 states giving credit to lawmakers for their service and 23 that did not, according to research by the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts. Four states didn't require continuing legal education. Eleven states provided a 'full CLE exemption for attorney legislators,' said Supreme Court spokesman Christopher Bonjean. 'The Illinois Supreme Court has been part of a national movement to recognize the educational value of activities outside of traditional coursework. One early example of this is attendance and teaching at bar association meetings,' Bonjean wrote in an emailed response. 'This has gradually expanded to legal scholarship, lawyer-to-lawyer mentoring and service on Supreme Court Boards, Commissions, and Committees. Expansion of limited credit for legislators is a continuation of this, and the Court most recently added a pilot project for CLE credit for providing pro bono legal assistance.' While a legislator could claim three hours of credit if a short committee meeting is the legislator's only committee hearing or full legislative session for the day, it is likely that every lawmaker will have other scheduled legislative days to participate in a full legislative session or committee hearing for at least three hours in either session, according to court officials. Legislative support included a letter co-signed by Welch 'along with more than 30 colleagues from both sides of the aisle asking the Supreme Court to consider recognizing the work legislators do as part of their continuing legal education requirement,' said Jon Maxson, Welch's spokesman. 'Throughout his time as a lawmaker and attorney, the speaker has completed his CLE requirements and will evaluate how this rule can contribute to this requirement going forward.' Similarly, Harmon spokesman John Patterson said the Senate president communicated to court officials his support for the new rule. Patterson said giving the credits to lawmakers has been talked about for many years and Harmon has indicated his support 'in passing conversations over the years.' 'It seems like a reasonable approach,' Patterson said. 'Continuing Legal Education programs are intended to make sure lawyers stay up to date with laws, and that's what lawmakers do on a daily basis during session.' Patterson said it is possible Harmon will tap into the new credits for legislative service, depending on what his overall tally of credits is when it is time for him to report. Curran, the Senate GOP's leader, said he was not sure if he would partake in the opportunity for credit because his law firm uses the Illinois State Bar Association's online offerings for educational purposes, but he said he supports the new rule. 'I thought it was a very appropriate accommodation by the Supreme Court in recognition of just the volume of statutory work we do as legislator lawyers,' Curran said. 'I would put the statutory work I do as a legislator against any CLE (course) that I've ever been a part of.' House Republican Leader Tony McCombie of Savana is not a lawyer. But her predecessor, former Rep. Jim Durkin, a former prosecutor from suburban Cook County, embraced the idea, saying his time spent debating, discussing, crafting and rewriting bills was more valuable than 'watching a CLE program on my laptop.' Giving credit to this select group of lawmakers, of course, raises the issue of whether the same opportunity should be made available to lawyers elected to city councils and village boards — a point Illinois Municipal League CEO Brad Cole said is a 'natural question.' In their own communities, Cole said, 'local officials write the laws too.' Cole said he would monitor how the credit is used by state lawmakers and, if all goes well, look at requesting the credit be expanded to include lawyers elected to local government positions. Asked whether lawyers elected to local posts should receive similar educational credits, Curran said: 'I think they should direct those issues to the court and ask the court to take a review of it.' One question that often arises in Springfield is, once you start expanding a benefit, where do you stop? In the 1980s, Democratic Sen. Frank Savickas of Chicago took advantage of a fast-paced day loaded with mundane bills to win support on a voice vote for an amendment that allowed lawmakers with a decade of service to become lawyers without going to law school. The one caveat was they had to pass the bar exam. Savickas, who was not a lawyer but enjoyed creating mischief, suggested, perhaps tongue-in-cheek, that legislators make laws and should be smart enough to use them professionally. The idea went nowhere once the proposal made headlines, but his move to make veteran lawmakers eligible to practice law became legendary. It even drew admiration from colleagues when the Senate passed a traditional memorial resolution years later upon his death. Even in Springfield, however, the resurrection of the Savickas proposal is unlikely — at least not anytime soon. Costa Howard 'can't imagine' it would pass today. 'Those of us who've actually graduated from law school and taken the bar would take umbrage with that,' she said.
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Illinois budget talks enter final week amid fears of congressional cuts
Illinois lawmakers have one week to pass a new state budget with little room for new spending and Congress presenting further challenges and uncertainty. Revenue projections had already been declining as the spring session has progressed. Now, lawmakers who have long feared further federal cuts, are grappling with the U.S House's passage of a spending plan that Illinois' Senate president warns would be 'catastrophic for working families' – as well as state finances. 'There's no state in the union that could survive the sorts of cuts they're proposing to health care for working families,' Senate President Don Harmon, D-Oak Park, told Capitol News Illinois about the bill that still needs U.S. Senate approval. The General Assembly has through May 31 to pass a budget with a simple majority vote before the threshold increases to a three-fifths vote on June 1. House Democrats approved a portion of last year's budget with the minimum number of votes required to pass a bill after several Democrats dissented over spending concerns. The state's fiscal picture is even more challenging this year. The Governor's Office of Management and Budget lowered revenue projections earlier this month for fiscal year 2026, which begins July 1, by $536 million from its February estimate, to $54.9 billion in revenue. Harmon told host Jak Tichenor on the latest episode of 'Illinois Lawmakers' that Senate Democrats have been told not to expect spending for new programs this year. 'This is a tougher year than we've seen in recent years; certainly the toughest since I've been Senate president,' Harmon said. 'We have some newer members who've never had to put together a budget like this one, so we tried to make sure people tempered their expectations.' Gov. JB Pritzker's introduced spending plan, which was proposed in February before the latest revenue projection cuts, called for a 3% increase in state spending in a budget totaling $55.2 billion. But outside of education, health care and pensions, spending was only projected to grow by 1%. WELCH The revenue projection cut means lawmakers likely have even less room for spending increases than what Pritzker requested in February. 'The biggest thing that I've said to the caucus pretty consistently since day one is that no one's going to get everything they want, that we have to have reasonable expectations, that we have to balance the budget,' House Speaker Chris Welch, D-Hillside, told Capitol News Illinois last week. 'We're going to spend what we bring in, no more.' The challenge of balancing the budget was complicated even further Thursday when, in the early morning hours, the U.S. House passed legislation to enact much of President Donald Trump's domestic agenda, which includes slashing federal spending on Medicaid, education and clean energy programs. 'The Trump administration and his policies are throwing a lot of uncertainty and making it a lot harder for us to determine how we're going to pay for the programs and services that our families rely on in Illinois,' state Rep. Anna Moeller, D-Elgin, who chairs a legislative working group that focuses on Medicaid policy, said during an interview. Medicaid, the health care program for low-income individuals that is jointly funded with state and federal dollars, is one of the largest categories of state government spending. The program is jointly funded with state and federal funds and provides health care coverage to more than 3.4 million people in Illinois, or about a fourth of the state's population. In fiscal year 2024, according to the Department of Healthcare and Family Services, the state received approximately $20 billion in federal matching funds for Medicaid. That represented about 62% of the program's total cost. But the legislation that passed the U.S. House Thursday morning would make substantial changes to the program that would both reduce the number of people covered by Medicaid and the amount of federal matching funds the state receives. One of the most significant provisions that would affect Illinois, according to a summary by the nonprofit health policy research organization KFF, would reduce the federal match rate paid for people enrolled through the Affordable Care Act expansion group by 10 percentage points. Under that 2010 health insurance reform law, also known as 'Obamacare,' states were allowed to expand eligibility for Medicaid to include working-age adults, including those without dependents, with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty level. In Illinois, more than 772,000 people are enrolled in Medicaid under that program and the federal government pays 90% of the cost of their care, according to IDHFS. But the House legislation would drop that matching rate to 80% for Illinois and other states that also provide health coverage or financial assistance to people who are not lawfully present in the United States. IDHFS has estimated that provision would cost Illinois approximately $815 million in federal matching funds per year because the state currently operates two such programs – one for adults ages 42-64, and another for seniors over age 65 – although Pritzker has proposed eliminating the one for adults under age 65. Under current state law, however, coverage under the ACA expansion program automatically ends if the federal government ever lowers its reimbursement rate below 90%. Other provisions of the congressional bill would require states to impose work requirements on enrollees in the ACA expansion group and require those individuals to verify their eligibility for the program at least twice per year. 'We don't have the resources to backfill that,' Moeller said. 'It would be beyond the scope of our budget right now to be able to do that.' The total impact the proposed legislation would have on Illinois remains unclear, and the bill still must be considered by the U.S. Senate, which could make changes of its own. Illinois would also have to spend more on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, beginning in 2028. The bill would require states to pay for 5% of benefits and 75% of administrative costs, rather than 50% of administrative costs and nothing for benefits. Other parts of the plan would slash federal tax incentives for clean energy and nuclear projects by the end of 2028, potentially forcing the state to pay more to reach its goal of carbon-free electricity by 2045. It's possible lawmakers will return to Springfield later this year to update the FY26 budget based on changes at the federal level. 'This president can send out a tweet that changes the world, and we may have to come back,' Welch said. 'And so, we've been preparing the caucus that that's a possibility: know that something could happen based on the federal budget that brings us back.' SPAIN-MCCOMBIE-HAMMOND PHOTO But Rep. Ryan Spain, R-Peoria, said there might not be any reason to have a special session to adjust the budget later this year after reviewing what the U.S. House passed. 'I think that's pretty silly, considering nothing will be effective immediately. We'll have a lot of time to adjust,' Spain said. Other legislative reforms being considered this spring also come with budget implications, and many may be off the table for now, according to Harmon. Lawmakers are continuing to work toward a funding solution to cover a $771 million funding gap for Chicago-area public transportation agencies in 2026. Despite being close to agreements on reforms for the agencies, funding remains undecided. Harmon suggested that people using the roadways rather than public transit could be a key funding source, while Rep. Eva-Dina Delgado, D-Chicago, who leads public transit talks in the House, said lawmakers are continuing to look at all options to close the gap. Pension reform has also been discussed to improve benefits for public employees who entered the system since 2011 and fix compliance with Social Security law. 'All of the solutions, however, require more money, and this is a year when we just don't have much more money,' Harmon said. 'So I expect some of those conversations to continue into the summer.' The same is true for changing how colleges and universities are funded. Lawmakers have held hearings on a plan that would prioritize funding to universities not receiving an adequate level of funding based on a mathematical formula. 'I don't see the requisite amount of money being driven into higher education funding formulas to achieve the outcome this year,' Harmon said. Pritzker has said he will not look at major tax hikes to balance the budget and asked lawmakers in February to come up with corresponding cuts for any new spending they want. He also proposed about $400 million in tax changes to balance the budget. But as progressive groups rallied in the capitol Thursday in favor of $6 billion of tax increases they want lawmakers to consider, Republicans feared Democrats will be tempted to tap into taxpayers to fund larger spending increases. House Democrats reviewed possible tax increases in a closed-door meeting Thursday afternoon. 'The legislature has a great track record of using this time, squandering time for many months, and using the waning hours of the legislative session to enact gigantic changes that have real world consequences for taxpayers,' Spain told reporters. Republicans hope Pritzker exercises caution. 'I know the governor in our first conversations before the budget address, when we sat down together, he wasn't celebrating,' House Minority Leader Tony McCombie, R-Savanna, told reporters. 'He knew that this was going to be a tough year, and it's going to continue to get tough as we go forward.' The budget is typically unveiled publicly a day or two before lawmakers leave Springfield for the year, meaning more details about spending and tax plans won't be available likely until at least Thursday. 'Less than 10 days out, it's exactly where you'd expect to be: more questions than answers,' Sen. Chapin Rose, R-Mahomet, told Capitol News Illinois.
Yahoo
16-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Illinois Senate President Don Harmon appeals $4 million dispute with state elections board
Illinois Senate President Don Harmon filed notice Wednesday that he plans to appeal the State Board of Elections' assertion he took millions of dollars more in campaign contributions than allowed under a law designed to reduce the impact of big money in Illinois politics. The filing by Harmon, a Democrat who championed the law at the heart of the dispute, comes just days after he made clear in a Tribune interview that he disagrees with the state board's interpretation that he accepted nearly $4.1 million above the contribution limits. Although Harmon didn't have to detail his reasons for appealing, his political committee's attorney, Michael Kasper, checked the box on a state board of elections form stating it 'does not believe' the contributions the board cited violated the limits and said the campaign fund 'will be appealing' the board's allegations. Kasper is a well-known Illinois election attorney who was once the top election lawyer for former House Speaker Michael Madigan's political and state government operations before the longtime Democratic leader's corruption conviction this year. The filing begins a formal process of challenging the board's position, a move that could lead to hearings and testimony in the coming months. 'I'm more confident now than I was when I got the notice that we have fully complied with the law,' Harmon said when asked about the matter again on Monday. At the heart of the disagreement is a significant and controversial loophole in state campaign finance law that allows politicians to collect contributions above state limits. A politician in a race for public office is allowed to open that loophole and collect unlimited funds if any candidate in the race in which they are running — themselves or an opponent — reports reaching a 'self-funding threshold' in which they have given or loaned their campaign funds more than $250,000 for statewide races and more than $100,000 for state lawmaker and local races. Supporters of the loophole initially said it was a defensive mechanism that allowed candidates to fundraise without limits if they were facing off against wealthy opponents who would have near-unlimited personal resources at their disposal. But it soon became an offensive weapon in which candidates — even those facing no competition whatsoever — purposely broke the self-funding threshold in order to collect as much political cash as possible. Harmon, who helped write the law, has done that himself. The Senate president has repeatedly given or loaned his campaign fund more than $100,000 — sometimes by just a single dollar — in order to trigger the loophole, a move political insiders call 'the money bomb.' The effort has been roundly criticized by advocates who want tighter restrictions on state campaign fundraising and was a focus of the Tribune's multipart 'Culture of Corruption' series. Specifically in the Harmon case, the disagreement between him and the state board hinges on whether the money bomb loophole was in effect between the March 2024 primary and the end of 2024, when the Friends of Don Harmon for State Senate campaign committee collected more than $8.3 million, nearly $4.1 million of which the state board said was over the campaign contribution limits. State records show Harmon gave his state Senate campaign committee more than $100,000 in January 2023, triggering the money bomb exemption that automatically lifts the caps. Harmon indicated in state election board paperwork that the move allowed him to keep collecting unlimited cash through the November 2024 election, and he continued to do so, taking in contributions as high as $1.2 million from the Chicago Land Operators Joint Labor and Management PAC. He did that even though the board had previously told him the loophole closed after the March 2024 primary. The board, which recently reviewed the matter following a Tribune inquiry, determined each of the public action committees that gave to Harmon following last year's primary should have been limited to contributions of no more than $68,500. Another group, the Sports Betting Alliance which is supporting an expansion of internet gambling in Illinois, gave $250,000 to Harmon's committee but should have been limited to donating no more than $13,700, according to the board. Harmon has signaled that legislation to make changes in state election laws could be forthcoming, including during this spring legislative session, but has not said whether any legislation would address the money bomb loophole. In appealing the board's claims, Harmon's campaign fund acknowledged that, if it loses the case, it could be subject to a penalty of up to $6.1 million — a figure based on the 150% of the amount the board deems a candidate willingly accepted over the limits — as well as a payment of nearly $4.1 million to the state's general operating fund. Such a massive penalty, however, is unlikely. Politicians frequently challenge the board, and negotiations can result in a fraction of the potential penalty. And if Harmon wins the appeal before the state board of elections, he could end up paying no penalty. _____
