An Illustration Of What Businesses And GOP Can Expect From Illinois’ Expanded Supermajority: Crumbs. – Wirepoints

By Mark Glennon*

You will get crumbs and you will shut up about it.

That might as well be the openly stated policy of Illinois’ Democratic establishment toward employers and toward any of the few lawmakers who stick up for employers.

I submit upfront for consideration the real point of this column, which is that you cannot expect to hear much squawking from those who can get only crumbs. That sad state of affairs is illustrated nicely by how the state’s unemployment trust fund is to be restored to solvency, a summation of which follows.

In the end, business groups and Republican lawmakers on their side mostly endorsed the recent legislation for the unemployment fund, but it certainly does not appear they got a fair deal. Instead, they got the best they could probably get – crumbs.

Jim Nowlan recently put it this way: “Republicans are irrelevant in Illinois politics today. Republicans should expect they’re going to be treated like dirt by Democrats.” Jim is a veteran in Illinois politics who has worn almost every hat related thereto. He said that in a different context, but his point applies to pretty much everything else, including matters important to employers, for whom it’s mostly some Republicans who look out.

Under those circumstances, it should come as no surprise that we have not heard much criticism of how the unemployment fund deal came down. Employers have other matters forever pending in the General Assembly, so silence may be prudence.

But criticism is in order, especially from the perspective of those of us who think Illinois employers are already overburdened by Illinois law. Here is the story from that perspective, which is about snow job after snow job receiving little challenge in the media and, ultimately, mostly silence from those who will pay.

The background is actually quite simple, revolving around one question: Who should pay to restore the fund to solvency, employers or the state? The state’s special fund that pays unemployment claims ran dry during the pandemic. The fund had to borrow $4.6 billion to keep up on unemployment claims during the pandemic, and further has to restore the fund to an actuarially sensible balance, which is now agreed to be about $1.7 billion.

Employers, understandably, didn’t think they should have to pay for that through taxes on them, which in normal times is how the fund gets its money. After all, the state was showered with federal pandemic relief that could be used for that purpose and the state claimed to have a budget surplus.

Moreover, it was the state’s own mismanagement of claims that led to the epic fraud that helped deplete the fund. Well over half of the $3.6 billion in unemployment claims paid out from July 2020 through June 2021 went to fraudsters. That was the state’s fault, not employers’. The federal government has issued scathing criticism at Illinois for failing to submit required information on that.

Only 22 state unemployment funds had to borrow anything at all from the federal government. Only three, fiscally profligate California, New York and Connecticut, still haven’t paid up.

In all, it seemed widely apparent that the state, at a minimum, should take responsibility for paying off the federal loan early on.

But it didn’t. Under criticism for that last year, Gov. JB Pritzker claimed federal bailout money couldn’t be used to pay off the federal loan. That was untrue and the first deception on the matter, which we and Capitol News Illinois called out at the time, to no avail.

So the standoff continued, effectively holding employers hostage in negotiations over the past year on who should pay. The state did pay down the federal loan by $2.7 billion in March using federal bailout money, which Pritzker has called “historic.” But by leaving the rest unpaid, the fund faced millions of dollars monthly in interest and penalties payable to the federal government by employers. The only other potential way to help fix the fund would have been a reduction in benefits, which neither side wanted.

The next snow job came in September when Pritzker held a much-ballyhooed press conference announcing that “the state would be making a significant payment toward the remaining balance” of the federal loan — $450 million. That’s how ABC Chicago and some others reported it, but you have to read further to see that it was the fund itself which had to make the payment, which means employers had to pay it through higher taxes.

Pritzker and Democratic lawmakers nevertheless congratulated themselves by saying the fund was able to do so thanks to their prowess in reducing unemployment claims. “This contribution is direct evidence of labor market strength in Illinois,” said Governor JB Pritzker“With unemployment claims levels continuing to reach historic lows, the State’s Unemployment Trust Fund is able to contribute to the loan repayment and save Illinois taxpayers in interest costs.”

In truth, however, there was nothing special about that drop in unemployment claims. The whole nation has seen it this year. Unemployment rolls have been at their lowest in 52 years. It’s the natural consequence of pandemic unemployment compensation expiring and the return to work after Covid.

Some Republican lawmakers called out that deception but the press ignored it and I regret that we missed it, too.

Then came last month’s announcement, another “historic” one, Pritzker said, of the deal for the state to pay off the remaining balance of the federal loan. We explained then why the deal was political theater that did not solve the entire matter. Restoring the fund to a proper balance was left to employers to fund, and $450 million of state assistance to the fund is merely a loan, which employers will have to repay. The increased burden on employers apparently will come mostly in the form of an increase in the base on which their tax is calculated.

But most of the press gobbled up Democrats’ claim of another “historic” victory. Columnist Rich Miller, ever willing to support Democratic spin, even tried to refute our story, falsely denying our point that more burden will fall on employers. And he used the same meaningless comparison Democrats used of what would happen if nothing were done. There would be a trainwreck for everybody if nothing was done. So what?

Our story was accurate, which was later affirmed by House Minority Leader Tony McCombie. But the story with McCombie’s comments was the exception, with most media just repeating Democrats’ claims of the “historic” deal.

So they went back for another round of the same, successful spin. Last week Pritzker held another press conference upon signing the legislation finalizing the deal.

And it worked again, with much the press simply repeating his press release about the legislation that Pritzker again called “historic.”

Now there is mostly silence on the matter. Those who have little choice but to beg for crumbs in Springfield aren’t likely to say much further, which is why we are happy not being a lobbying organization.

*Mark Glennon is founder of Wirepoints.

17 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Freddy
1 year ago

Somewhat of a side note. This seems to be a priority in Springfied. Next they will probably put up a Molock statue.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/satanic-temple-installs-holiday-display-190653386.html

Chunky Puree
1 year ago

Summation, democrats destroy everything they touch.

sue
1 year ago

HOW DO YOU THINK THE DEMS REALLY WON?????????/

nixit
1 year ago

As I explained in another post, the Dem super-majority means a handful of Democrats can vote against the party line, allowing them to play pretend to their base, without changing the intended outcome the Democrats wanted all along. This will be deployed strategically based on competition. See the Bill Cunningham example below. Bill can come across as pro-police/tough-on-crime to his SW side constituents who lean more centrist, but that changed nothing about the SAFE-T Act because his fellow Dems already had the votes. If his vote was the tie-breaker, he’d have voted along party lines. Whether the likes of Democrats… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by nixit
jajujon
1 year ago

I have no sympathy for the Illinois Republican Party. Yes, more voters filled in the little circles next to Ds. And yes, with the MSM neglecting its fundamental duty to objectively report, conservatives have an uphill battle. However, dozens of Republican politicians accepted PAC money from the unions and kept their mouths shut about Amendment 1. None of them are renegade enough, vocal enough, disruptive enough, to risk their seat by calling out the wrongs, organizing marches, taking it to the people and educating the populace. Instead, they form their little caucus meetings and whine, “Woe is me.” A worthless… Read more »

michael marek
1 year ago

anyone surprised?…beggars can’t be choosy

Where's Mine ???
1 year ago

This is yet one more stab to business and employers in state to go along with– Amendment 1, sky-high workman’s comp, sky-high taxes & prop taxes, endless employee mandates & regulations, crazy lawsuit friendly state, BIPA, and on and on, etc,etc. Why would any business want to locate in Illinois???? Is it any wonder why Stellantis is shutting down plant and JB & the Machine EV incentives program is a complete joke. And now out of desperation to save face, JB & the Machine are expanding EV /state tax subsidy program to other non EV businesses. And JB’s going to… Read more »

Poor Taxpayer
1 year ago

Shut up and pay your taxes.
Pay more get less is the new Illinois Slogan.
On the pack of the 1st pension check are directions for cops to get to Punta Gorda, Fl.

Policy Wonk
1 year ago

Mark, as usual your article is intriguing and informative, but you miss one big mark – “The State” does not pay, we the people do. Again and again here in Illinois, and every politician’s press conference is an attempt at a snow job. It is the failed “journalists” who do not ask the tough questions nor follow-up on the BS answers. Those people should be called out by name, like Rich Miller, Andy Shaw, Carol Marin, Mary Ann Ahern, Craig Wall, Charles Thomas, Laura Washington, Mike Flannery, Tahman Bradley, Rick Pearson, Jeff Zeleny, Bill Cameron, Lynn Sweet, among others and… Read more »

debtsor
1 year ago
Reply to  Policy Wonk

Because we live in a corrupt one-party state where there is no accountability. Not much different than a 3rd world country. Our crime rates and fiscal situation reflect this.

But harpy suburban women screaming ‘muh abortion!!!!1’ is why the state is so screwed up.

Where's Mine ???
1 year ago

dummy me, I’m a little confused where the figure of $450 million state still owes feds comes from. State borrowed from feds $4.6 billion and paid back $2.7 billion = $1.9 billion, not $450 million?

BobH
1 year ago

This is par for the course. The small to medium sized business owners are the ones who are negatively impacted the most. Why do they insist on staying in this state when there are many states that would love to have them? Indiana, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri and Tennessee have business climates that are far more welcoming than Illinois. They should include strategic relocation within their business plans or risk being pushed to the side by lower cost competitors from neighboring states. The up front costs of relocating are far less than the long term costs of staying in Illinois… Read more »

jajujon
1 year ago
Reply to  BobH

Have you started or run a small business? Starting one involves risk. Example: a successful hair salon is that way because it nurtured its clientele over years of operations. They can’t take their clients with them when they relocate to, say, Indiana, so they again start from scratch. If I compare higher taxes and more burdensome regulations with the risks of starting over, which is the more sure bet? I may not like the impact of state mismanagement, but it’s less expensive and less risky to stay than go. So don’t broad brush small businesses, thinking it’s easy to leave.

Former Illinois Wimp
1 year ago
Reply to  jajujon

Of course, it’s not easy to leave, but the alternative is to slowly be driven out of business thru regulations and taxation. If you have managed to run a profitable business in Illinois, that same business model should be even more successful in a business-friendly state. Starting over totally bites, but past success should provide some measure of confidence going forward.

SadStateofAffairs
1 year ago

Started over in North Texas around 10 months ago, all good and still come back quite often for family things. Its nice exploring your new place and your new people, its also different in a good way because I am not jaded like I was back home. I don’t know anything and that’s probably a good thing!!!🤣 Most important thing to realize is its not that hard. Hardest part is taking that first step. Believe me, once you get there you will mentally be in a better place. Although I have some grave concerns about the future of this country,… Read more »

Former Illinois Wimp
1 year ago

Good words of encouragement.

SIGN UP HERE FOR FREE WIREPOINTS DAILY NEWSLETTER

Home Page Signup
First
Last
Check all you would like to receive:

FOLLOW US

 

WIREPOINTS ORIGINAL STORIES

A statewide concern: Illinois’ population decline outpaces neighboring states – Wirepoints on ABC20 Champaign

“We are not in good shape” Wirepoints’ Ted Dabrowski told ABC 20 Champaign during a segment on Illinois’ latest population losses. Illinois was one of just three states to shrink in the 2010-2020 period and has lost another 300,000 people since then. Ted says things need to change. “It’s too expensive to live here, there aren’t enough good jobs and nobody trusts the government anymore. There’s just other places to go where you can be more satisfied.”

Read More »

WE’RE A NONPROFIT AND YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS ARE DEDUCTIBLE.

SEARCH ALL HISTORY

CONTACT / TERMS OF USE