Chicago Fanatics Message Board
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

Yep, shaking up Springfield
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=96363		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  badrogue17 [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 7:50 am ]
Post subject:  Yep, shaking up Springfield
I know you can support that he's trying to change the status quo but my goodness. Yeah those working poor families where both parents have to work and ned help with daycare are the problem Have less kids!! Make more money so Mom can stay at home, plebes !!What a fucking douche. Im sure he just hasn't come to the part where he goes after his rich buddies yet.

[i]Thwarted by lawmakers in his efforts to dramatically cut state spending, Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner has turned to a workaround, using an obscure rule-making process to repeatedly tighten eligibility requirements for numerous social service programs for children, the elderly and the disabled.

The tactic is another front in his ongoing battle with Democrats who control the General Assembly, turning a normally staid legislative panel responsible for drafting rules and procedures into a bickering partisan body that has difficulty finding common ground.

Now as Rauner continues to try to force additional cuts, his latest plan would make it more difficult for people to try to get state services restored once they lose them. Critics say it amounts to a one-two punch: First, thousands of people lose home care or help paying for food and electricity; then they face a harder time proving they really need the help.

Democrats and social service groups sharply criticize the end run, saying Rauner is governing by rule and abusing his administrative power to push through changes without proper vetting.

"In the years that I have served, I have never seen anything like it. I have never seen such a single-minded dedication from a governor to try to balance the budget on the backs of seniors, people with disabilities and children," said Rep. Greg Harris, D-Chicago. "It's a question of are you using your executive authority to circumvent things that should be done legislatively?"

Supporters counter that Rauner is simply taking advantage of one of the very few options he has to reduce spending when roughly 90 percent of the budget is going out the door during the lengthy impasse via court order or existing law. The situation is putting Illinois on track to spend billions more than it's taking in.

"This may be shocking to the system and the protocol and the feel and jibe of what has been, I get that, but we are truly in new circumstances, these are unventured territories," said Rep. Ron Sandack of Downers Grove, Republican co-chairman of the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, the panel that's responsible for overseeing the minutiae of putting a law in place.

"There is only so much that the administration can control, and the few things they can are really difficult topics, it's not fun," he added.

At the center of the fight is the state's subsidized child care program, which helps low-income families pay for day care so parents can work or go to school. Rauner first targeted the program for cuts when he proposed his budget shortly after taking office. But Democrats roundly rejected his spending plan, sending him their own version that he largely vetoed.

On July 1, the start of the new budget year, Rauner put in place so-called "emergency rules" to immediately raise child care copays and sharply limit who qualifies. His administration also set new income limits for the elderly who receive help at home with cooking, cleaning, bathing and dressing.


[/i
Author:  a retard [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 10:42 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
...Rauner is simply taking advantage of one of the very few options he has to reduce spending when roughly 90 percent of the budget is going out the door during the lengthy impasse via court order or existing law.....

Until they fix the pension mess this is like cutting out the daily starbucks while continuing to borrow to pay on the upside down mcmansion mortgage. Except of course these cuts hurt the people who need the help the most.
Author:  Brick [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 10:54 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
I'm fine with this. If you don't make enough money to put your kids in daycare that is your problem. No one should be guaranteeing that you can work and take care of your kids at the same time. Get a better job. Low paying jobs are not meant to be a career.
Author:  pittmike [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:26 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
I'm fine with this. If you don't make enough money to put your kids in daycare that is your problem. No one should be guaranteeing that you can work and take care of your kids at the same time. Get a better job. Low paying jobs are not meant to be a career.



Isn't that the way it used to be though? Say prior to the 70's or so people didn't just pop out a kid without having a plan. Both parents didn't have to work then either. But not that many generations ago paid for day care and breakfast at school etc. were not expected rights.
Author:  Spaulding [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:33 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
I'm fine with this. If you don't make enough money to put your kids in daycare that is your problem. No one should be guaranteeing that you can work and take care of your kids at the same time. Get a better job. Low paying jobs are not meant to be a career.


Are you being sarcastic?
Author:  Brick [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
pittmike wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
I'm fine with this. If you don't make enough money to put your kids in daycare that is your problem. No one should be guaranteeing that you can work and take care of your kids at the same time. Get a better job. Low paying jobs are not meant to be a career.



Isn't that the way it used to be though? Say prior to the 70's or so people didn't just pop out a kid without having a plan. Both parents didn't have to work then either. But not that many generations ago paid for day care and breakfast at school etc. were not expected rights.
Yup.
Author:  Brick [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:42 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
Spaulding wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
I'm fine with this. If you don't make enough money to put your kids in daycare that is your problem. No one should be guaranteeing that you can work and take care of your kids at the same time. Get a better job. Low paying jobs are not meant to be a career.


Are you being sarcastic?
Not really.

If we aren't going to worry about those on minimum wage why should we worry about anyone? Every man and woman and child for themselves.
Author:  DannyB [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
I don't blame Rauner at all. He had the work ethic and foresight to engineer his birth to smart parents. All these lazy kids who couldn't manage the same way should be weeded out. Most of them are too dumb to bother to vote anyways. Too busy watching TV while Mommy is "working" at Popeye's.
Author:  Walt Williams Neck [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:54 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
I just want to get payed if I play the lottery :(
Author:  Councilman Les Whinen [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
Wait, so this isn't about shakes running for office?
Author:  bigfan [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
not that it is the same thing, but I was just at CHASE, with the big NOTICE that loose Change deposited that isnt rolled in coin wrappers will be charged a fee.

Really scrapping the bottom of the piggy bank for this one?
Author:  conns7901 [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
pittmike wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
I'm fine with this. If you don't make enough money to put your kids in daycare that is your problem. No one should be guaranteeing that you can work and take care of your kids at the same time. Get a better job. Low paying jobs are not meant to be a career.



Isn't that the way it used to be though? Say prior to the 70's or so people didn't just pop out a kid without having a plan. Both parents didn't have to work then either. But not that many generations ago paid for day care and breakfast at school etc. were not expected rights.


There were also regular jobs with livable wages when you got out of high school that didn't involve working for the city or getting into a union.
Author:  a retard [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Spaulding wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
I'm fine with this. If you don't make enough money to put your kids in daycare that is your problem. No one should be guaranteeing that you can work and take care of your kids at the same time. Get a better job. Low paying jobs are not meant to be a career.


Are you being sarcastic?
Not really.

If we aren't going to worry about those on minimum wage why should we worry about anyone? Every man and woman and child for themselves.


But it's not "every man and woman and child for themselves" as you say. Higher-income state employees are receiving taxpayer-subsidized pensions (in many cases multiple pensions) which, in large part, is the reason for our state's financial trouble. If must be taxed to help others, I would rather it be low income people, not those earning higher income.
Author:  StevenWilliams [ Sat Oct 03, 2015 7:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yep, shaking up Springfield
Day care centres provides all the basic facilities for children, and it is the best option for working parents. Children get opportunity to socialize and interact. For more information you can visit http://www.callingallkidsagain.com online.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/