Republican Gov. Jim Edgar and his chief nemesis in the legislature, House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-Chicago), dispensed with pleasantries Wednesday and immediately faced off in a spat over the key provision of the governor’s proposed $29.2 billion budget.
In asking the General Assembly for a permanent continuation of the temporary state income-tax surcharge to finance higher spending on education and social programs, Edgar declared: “This budget does not raise taxes.”
The governor, who pledged in his 1990 campaign to hold the line on taxes, would take the $211 million from municipalities that now receive it in what he described as a “choice between kids and concrete.”
Madigan, in turn, ridiculed Edgar’s contention-“I think it’s a tax increase,” he said of the proposed surcharge extension-and indicated that the spring legislative session will be full of political brinkmanship and horse trading.
“For the third year in a row, he has proposed increasing taxes to provide for an increase in the state bureaucracy,” Madigan said, referring to Edgar’s plan to spend more in education, the Department of Children and Family Services and the Department of Mental Health.
Madigan said he was opposed to a continuation of the tax unless part of it is given to cities to defray public safety expenses. In doing so, the speaker sided with Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and other mayors who want to keep their share of the surcharge, which is scheduled to expire June 30.
The powerful Southwest Side politician, who presides over a 67-51 House majority, was characteristically taciturn about his agenda.
Although he advocated keeping the full $211 million for municipalities, Madigan left the door open to negotiating a smaller share for them. He was noncommital about whether an extension of the surcharge should be permanent or temporary.
One thing was clear: Edgar’s budget address and Madigan’s cool response had put the final chess pieces in place for what is shaping up as a tedious, partisan battle over state tax and spending priorities during the General Assembly’s spring session.
“I suppose it will be a battle,” conceded Senate President James “Pate” Philip, the Du Page County Republican in his first term presiding over the upper chamber, where the GOP has a 32-27 advantage.
In his new role, the conservative Philip will be nearly as important in the outcome of the session as Edgar and Madigan, and he immediately adopted the party line.
“I think he’s right on the mark,” Philip said of Edgar’s budget proposal. “There’s a lot of support on my side of the aisle for it, and I think he should proceed ahead. . . . My guess is he will have the votes in the Senate.”
While Philip predicted an eventual compromise, House Minority Leader Lee Daniels (R-Elmhurst) said Edgar’s budget will get a “tremendous reception” in his caucus. And new Senate Minority Leader Emil Jones (D-Chicago) suggested that the governor was playing a shell game with the surcharge funds by asking lawmakers to choose between children and public safety.
Edgar acknowledged that his budget is unlikely to remain intact. “The General Assembly might have different priorities, and that’s what we’ll be talking about here the next few months,” the governor told reporters.
As Edgar points toward re-election-Taxpayers’ Federation of Illinois President James Nowlan called the budget proposal “an astute political document”-few Capitol observers expect much to interfere with fiscal issues this spring.
Mega-projects that typically dominate a session, such as proposals for land-based casino gambling and a third airport for Chicago, are on a far back burner.
One issue that does figure to enter the mix is a Republican initiative to extend property-tax caps beyond the collar counties to the entire state, which municipalities will argue makes it harder for them to give up the surcharge funds. It is an argument that could sway some suburban GOP lawmakers.
Another is the uncertain future of a Medicaid assessment program that was unpopular with Republican legislators when it was adopted last year. Until a new policy is agreed upon, with the approval of President Clinton’s administration, Edgar will have a $1 billion hole in his budget.
What impressed Nowlan and others was Edgar’s play to marshal educators and social-welfare advocates, many of whom traditionally support Democratic initiatives, to back his spending plan at the same time that a rebounding economy will put more than $400 million in new revenue at the governor’s disposal.
In pleading his case, Edgar said he has significantly cut the size of state government since 1991 and argued that federal mandates and court orders have tied his hands on a substantial portion of his proposed spending.
Anticipating the complaints of some local governments, Edgar promised to join them in identifying and eradicating costly state mandates and portrayed them as greedy for trying to hang onto a “windfall.”
But despite all of the hoopla over Edgar’s budget message Wednesday, his third since taking office in 1991, there was a certain familiarity to the situation. Edgar attempted to take the municipalities’ share of the surcharge a year ago, but was thwarted by Madigan.
As Carter Hendren, Philip’s chief of staff, observed: “It’s going to be a hell of a session.”
