I'm not a big fan of pork, but I'd better get used to it:
Police stations, city halls, and fire trucks. Salsa programs, concession stands and graffiti removal.
Call them essential or call them pork. Either way, Illinois lawmakers would be able to hand out millions of dollars in projects under the state budget they're considering.
The $59 billion spending plan the House approved 99-9 Thursday sets aside money for hundreds of projects. Schools, hospitals, roads, churches and parks all would benefit.
Lawmakers said the budget provides more than $2.5 million in what legislators call "member initiatives" to each of the 59 Senate districts. That would be about $150 million, but the total wasn't clear. Each senator would control half the money for a district, and the two representatives would split the rest.
I wonder if there are any higher-priority uses for that $150 to $200 million? Pension funding, education funding - heck, even health insurance for poor children?
Notably, State Sen. Mike Frerichs and the Senate Democrats have declined to identify their "member initiative" projects by line-item in the budget, meaning that the public won't know which projects will get state funding, and that the State Senators will be the sole arbiter of what is and isn't a legitimate project. Frerichs, of course, campaigned loudly and vigorously against pork (and especially against this particular process of awarding pork) during the 2006 campaign.
Frerichs said member initiatives should undergo some kind of review before they're included in the budget.
"After four years of watching George Ryan, we should hold ourselves to a higher standard," he said, somehow forgetting the Blagojevich years. "What we can do is have something similar to the Capital Development Board where you have objective standards and take it out of the hands of the politicians to determine what gets funded first, rather than who has more seniority, who cuts what deals and who's from what district.
"For too often and too long, we've governed like that. And sure, sometimes money goes toward good causes, but sometimes it goes to projects that don't pass the smell test."
Now, Frerichs has voted for a budget that follow the same process that last year didn't "pass the smell test" and a budget that includes:
The projects include $25,000 to expand the city hall in Johnston City in southern Illinois, $100,000 for security cameras in a Chicago ward and $200,000 for a new police station in Aurora.
There's also $20,000 for graffiti removal in Cicero, $40,000 for community programs through the Chicago International Salsa Congress, $60,000 for volleyball courts at Stars and Stripes Park in Chicago and $100,000 for a park concession stand in Brookfield.
I am disappointed, but not surprised.
UPDATE: More from Frerichs on pork:
State Sen. Mike Frerichs, D-Gifford, said he wished that member initiatives were not needed to pass a budget, but acknowledged that they did play a role in getting some members to vote yes.
As of Thursday night, he said he had no idea what projects in his district would get funding and how much.
"I would like to see (member initiatives) all done away with, but if they are going to be in there, I don't want to miss out on the money for my district," he said.
what kind of modification to the State Constitution could stop this kind of thing? Not that it would happen, of course. I mean, hey, I can see the State's need to clean up the graffitti in Cicero and to have a fountain in Champaign.
It would take a modification of voters who would stop putting up with these things... even when the money would come to their district.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
That last quote from Frerichs makes it clear why so-called pork barrel spending, "member initiatives" by any other name, will never be eliminated. He doesn't like it, but as long as it's being offered, he's not going to miss out on his piece of the pie.
I would like to see Frerichs volunteer the information on his member initiatives.
-BBB
"I would like to see Frerichs volunteer the information on his member initiatives."
There is no need for Frerichs to do this. He is not up for election, nor will he be in the near future. Politicians only talk against "Pork" when they are campaigning.
Politicians only talk against "Pork" when they are campaigning.
And only then if they want to sound conservative
Or kosher.
I'm not having a problem with member initiatives, as long as it's equal to each district. I say that because otherwise I'd be concerned that if every individual project had to pass through the entire budget negotiations, downstate would never see a dollar and Chicago would get everything.
If the money is equal to each district regardless of what part of the state or the seniority of the Senator, well a dollar (or 2.5 million) goes farther downstate than it goes in Chicago, and downstate gets a better shake there. And then downstate doesn't get ignored. And then each Senator/Representative will be responsible to their voters for how it's spent.
I realize that there's a danger(a reality) of those funds to be spent on things that favor high-end donors(i.e. stupid fountains), so maybe there should be strictures on what the money can be spent on. But they(Sen/Rep) has to be ultimately responsible for how the dollars or spent or else how can they be held accountable at election time?
My question is: Without member initiatves, how would downstate be assured of getting a fair shake on State dollars for police/ fire department equiptment, bridge repairs and the like?
I miss Jim Edgar!
Oy vey! I'm gonna plotz ! :^)
"I'm not having a problem with member initiatives..."
Spoken like an Illinois voter. Member initiatives or "pork" or home political districts cut of federal or state $'s are just to get the incumbent re-elected. There is no need for it if the politician is doing his or her job representing the interests of the voters.
Gee all I hear when I go to a small town is how happy they are that they received the new 250,000 dollar Fire Truck for their volunteer department from some member initiative. I can hardly blame them considering that many state requirements make that truck to expensive to buy for their small town.
I might add though it would have been smarter to leverage the over billion dollars in member initiatives into a Capitol Plan and capture the federal funds which would have allowed us to spend 20 billion across the State on Roads, Bridges and Schools rather then just the billion.
Run and Local Voter,
I see what you are saying, and if what Run says is accurate (NOT saying you're wrong, I just don't know) than yes, better to leverage for federal dollars. But LV, I see through the "pork to get re-elected" part, I think. If everyone gets those dollars, then I see that the local incumbant did NOTHING to get control of those dollars, and the question is "what did you do with your portion of the pig?" And 2.5 Mil didn't come from out of thin air, it came from the paychecks of those in those districts. They deserve some guarantee that some of those taxes wil be spent on their needs.
I am not saying that I think of the "initiatives" as some great work our locals did for us...that's just our wee portion of the whole.
OF COURSE I measure our local politicians by what NECCESSARY portion of state funds (aside from initiatives) come to downstate for NECCESSARY things, like roads and schools, and UofI, and such. AND, 12 million for the MTD?!?! I wanna know how much of that is capital need , and how much is just paying FAT salaries?!?!
All I am saying is that I think all Senatorial districts should have a guaranteed part of the pie to shore up things that don't mean squat to the Chicago machine, but that WE (downstaters) need. Each district should just get an equal amount for discretionary spending... I don't mean to sound leftist, but c'mon each district should have some guaranteed funds to use for the good of the district. And I would not be opposed to giving up those funds for a few years, if it were to get the state out of debt, but NOT so it goes to a Chicago stadium or Chicago roads, or Chicago,Chicago, Chicago.... or overinflated salaries for whomever!!
Please don't mistake that for: "give us ours to waste on stupid stuff ( Like Fountains)"
I see it as "everybody gets this money, you(Senator or Rep.) get NO points from me for getting it, you get points from me by how you spend it to benefit ALL of us!
I agree with the big salaries as being a problem, as other things you listed are problems but not problems that the state GA can fix or that many of the people that may receive the money can fix. You seem to pick out the Fountain and make it an example of it as it as if it is a majority of the stuff which is bought with this money when it is just the minority. You obviously have not come from a small town with a budget of 300,000 dollars and have every one doing volunteer work to run the city then have the state passing unfunded mandates to put in water treatment systems that cost 3 times your budget.
(NOT saying you're wrong, I just don't know)--I would be happy to take you with me though the next election cycle and you can talk to all the mayors, county board members, and people cooking sausage yourself it as many other people know is quite fun actually.
If the fire district cannot support itself then a "gift" of a new truck is not going to help. There are a lot better ways to support all of these initiatives than through PORK a pure political way of getting someone else to pay for a benefit of a few and re-elect the chosen. Yes, you can think of it as "just our wee portion of the whole", which put you in the same class as those thieves empting stores after Katrina. It doesn' t take a lot of effort to understand these little initiatives add up to millions and millions of dollars heaped on the taxpayers of Illinois for the sole purpose of getting politicians re-elected. Even the BIG PORK, like 12.5 million for the CU MTD is nothing but a state tax burden to benefit totally non-elected elite Board and a few riders, most of whom are students.
Don't get me wrong I am not for every pork project that comes along. I think you will have a little trouble explaining to a town, that sorry your neighbor’s house burned down but we didn't have a fire truck to drive to the fire, or do you just want them to close the town?
PR, I hear you, and I agree. If the State is going to be passing out money for local projects, then an even split by legislative district at least makes if fairly equitable.
I just don't think the state should fund local projects at all. Nothing for baseball fields (even in Danville), fountains, parks, youth centers, school signs, fire trucks, all-weather tracks - nothing. Show me the benefit to the entire state, or don't pay for it with state money. I know thats "pollyanna", but wouldn't it be cool? (Oh, and dittos for the Feds - if it is not a national issue, don't pay for it.)
I am particularly supportive of equiptment for fire and police, because they often need equiptment that is new technology and very expensive. And them having such equiptment in each locality IS of benefit to the state as a whole. I would also agree that if you get an unfunded mandate, your local Senator/Reps, should look at those first, and fight to get that mandate funded..
I also think it is not advisable to use that money to provide salalries or long term investments of any sort, as those would potentially need to be funded year after year and should really be part of the State budget, and IS a mark of an effective legislator.
Fire trucks should be bought by cities. Are they expensive - yeah. They should plan.
"Fire trucks should be bought by cities. Are they expensive - yeah. They should plan."
I live in Royal. Population varies. People die, sometimes they're born, they move away, every once in several years someone builds a new house. Bottom line, as Laura puts it, we have a couple hundred folks in this village on a good day.
Ain't no amount of planning gonna buy our fire trucks. We can scrape up enough for some of the other smaller equipment, but even that doesn't get updated or maintained as well or as often as it should. You just can't hold enough fish frys to match even one or two state and federal grants.
And before you say that several communities should pitch in together, you should know that they are all in the same boat. Ogden, Homer, Gifford, Flatville, Penfield, it's all the same story.
So unless you think that it's okay to wait twenty to thirty minutes for a fire truck to show up when our grade school is on fire, or as is more often the case (and therefore more vital), for the paramedics on the fire rescue vehicle to show up at your grandma's house when she's having a stroke or a heart attack, you can take your ideological purity and, well, you know. I'll take every dime of state or federal money we can get for stuff like this.
RSW, I think they are actually Fire Protection Districts in many case's which may include a small town so they can get some economy of scale. The Fire truck with it's new equipment and safer technology and equipment help keep the volunteer fire fighter alive. Many times the that equipment is half their budget or more they have sausage and pancake breakfasts (you may have been to one in Mahomet, while it's a fund raiser for their school the one in Philo is one of the best) and other fund raisers to fund them. I know that they also get funding though tax's but their tax base isn't huge and it's really hard for them to pay for these things. As I said I understand your point and agree but some of these unfunded mandates by State and Federal governments should be paid for by them.
So is Danville small enough to claim poverty and get a free firetruck? What about Effingham? The small towns are asking for charity - Champaign and Urbana buy their own firetrucks, don't they? Maybe we should just have an Illinois fire department, and let the State just do it all.
Kevin, Here's a thought - move!
Why should the state provide a fire truck for 200 people? We don't have a fire truck for every 200 people in Urbana; why should you have it in your town? Maybe Gifford, Royal, Penfield and Flatville should merge. Certainly the schools should consolidate.
Who says government should provide a way for you to live the way you want to live regardless of the cost or viability?
Who says that those communities are not already in a fire protection district whose budget can't pay for a Fire truck. I think the districts have to be small enough that the truck should get there in time to at least to watch the fire go out unfortunately those districts budgets sometimes are not big enough to support the purchase of such a big ticket item.
I think we can make some distinctions between the Budgets of Royal and Champaign. I think the cost of printing Champaign's budget is greater then Royals whole operating Budget.
If you think I am going to leave a fire fighter out there hanging, especially a volunteer fire fighter, well it aint going to happen.
"Kevin, Here's a thought - move!
Why should the state provide a fire truck for 200 people? We don't have a fire truck for every 200 people in Urbana; why should you have it in your town? Maybe Gifford, Royal, Penfield and Flatville should merge. Certainly the schools should consolidate.
Who says government should provide a way for you to live the way you want to live regardless of the cost or viability?"
You really shouldn't speak on subjects you obviously know absolutely nothing about. The schools in Flatville, Royal, and Ogden have already merged into the Prairieview-Ogden school district. And while the volunteer fire brigades in these communities and Gifford are technically separate, they actually cooperate a great deal already and regularly cover each other on calls. In fact, I think that Ogden and Royal might share joint responsibility for calls in most of the township.
I'm not sure exactly how villages themselves (or even their fire districts) are supposed to merge. You seem to be geographically challenged when you say stuff like that. You do realize that we're talking about villages that are five, ten, even fifteen miles apart, right? Not to mention the farmhouses that are scattered across every single mile of the grid of roads in the entire county.
The issue here isn't raw population. The issue is geographic proximity in relation to population density. That's why you don't need a fire truck for every 200 people in Urbana. But you do need a separate fire truck in most townships, which cover a much broader geographic area. Urbana has about ten times more fire trucks per square mile than we will ever have, even with state help.
What you don't seem to understand is that the key to effective firefighting (and life saving paramedical services) is response time. That's why there are multiple firehouses spread all over Urbana and Champaign. And that's why you need a volunteer fire brigade in almost every township in the county.
But hey, you're right, why should those farmers live in the country? Why should anyone live anywhere in the rural parts of the county? We should just dismantle every single house and school and barn between Urbana and Danville, or between Champaign and Bloomington. Everyone should just live inside the city limits of Urbana and Champaign, where life is perfect because, well, there's just so gosh darn many of you.
Kevin your not moving pigs next door to me are you?
"Kevin your not moving pigs next door to me are you?"
Nah. Couple chickens, maybe. We'll keep the pigs inside the house with us...
:) Good, call me for supper though.
bwah haha :-)
Boy it sure is easy to "get Kevin's goat."
"Boy it sure is easy to "get Kevin's goat.""
You're right. We haven't been able to keep goats for years, for that very reason. Darn city folks kept comin out and snatchin them, even when we had them tied up inside the back fence. (The goats, that is. Not the city folks. We keep them in the cage behind the wallowin' pen. It's kinda like a mini Gitmo, but don't smell as good.)
I always figured it was the Satanists getting our goats for some sorta evil demonic rituals, but Laura says it was probably just lonely traveling salesmen.
At one point we thought about using bicycle locks, but we couldn't figure out which end to put them on.