* Assistant Transportation Secretary David Phelps held a press conference yesterday in southern Illinois a day in advance of Rep. John Bradley’s hearing on the governor’s budget vetoes. Phelps was asked about the political nature of the guv’s vetoes and had this response…
“Any representative who accuses someone of being political (referencing the governor’s budget cuts) is being political himself,” Phelps said.
I wonder if David managed to keep a straight face during that.
* The reporter got in a pretty good zing on Phelps as well…
While the oft-repeated mantra at the press conference was that working together can help solve differences of opinion, the opposite appeared to be in effect. How else would one explain the fact that Bradley was not invited to a press conference held in his own district by members of his own party?
Valid point.
* Meanwhile, we covered the governor’s latest lawsuit yesterday, but some of you may have missed it. Here are a few stories…
* Tribune…
Gov. Rod Blagojevich on Tuesday filed a second lawsuit in his continuing battle with Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, this time in an attempt to force action on his recent budget vetoes.
Blagojevich sued House Clerk Mark Mahoney in Sangamon County Circuit Court for failing to record the $460 million in cuts he made.
Blagojevich alleges in the suit that the state constitution requires the changes be entered “immediately.” After going on the books, House lawmakers then would have 15 days to accept or reject the governor’s cuts. By failing to record the vetoes when legislators met last week, House leaders delayed action, and ultimately implementation, of the budget, the governor contends.
* Post-Dispatch…
But House leaders did not enter the objections when the House met for a one-day session last week. Instead, they delayed action until after a set of 19 public hearings are held around the state on the budget cuts. The first set of those hearings are scheduled for today.
Blagojevich wants the court to require the House to enter his objections into its journal, speeding up any possible veto fight.
* GateHouse…
Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said the 15-day limit does not apply to spending bills.
“They ought to read the constitution,” Brown said. “I don’t know that anyone thinks the 15 days applies to appropriations.”
I dunno about that. Here’s the passage, with emphasis added…
The Governor may reduce or veto any item of appropriations in a bill presented to him. Portions of a bill not reduced or vetoed shall become law. An item vetoed shall be returned to the house in which it originated and may become law in the same manner as a vetoed bill. An item reduced in amount shall be returned to the house in which it originated and may be restored to its original amount in the same manner as a vetoed bill except that the required record vote shall be a majority of the members elected to each house.
* And if you missed it yesterday, here are the documents…
* Complaint
* Memorandum in support of plaintiff’s complaint for mandamus
* Summons
- Larry Mullholland - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 9:42 am:
On a local tangential note…House Clerk Mark Mahoney has been given a minor boost in his re-election efforts.(2010)
By Blago suing him, Mahoney’s independent (anti-BLAGO) credentials have been solidified. :-)
As many already know, his Aldermanic Ward has many front line state employees who have witnessed the Team Blago Train wreck first hand….
- s - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 10:05 am:
Rich, I think it is helpful to put the WHOLE passage in here. The key line is that the appropriations bills reduction and item veto “may
become law in the same manner as a vetoed bill”.
That means the Section C line that “The house to which a bill is returned shall
immediately enter the Governor’s objections upon its journal…” applies to reduction and item vetoes, since that is part of the manner of becoming law.
See below:
“(a) Every bill passed by the General Assembly shall be
presented to the Governor within 30 calendar days after its
passage. The foregoing requirement shall be judicially
enforceable. If the Governor approves the bill, he shall sign
it and it shall become law.
(b) If the Governor does not approve the bill, he shall
veto it by returning it with his objections to the house in
which it originated. Any bill not so returned by the Governor
within 60 calendar days after it is presented to him shall
become law. If recess or adjournment of the General Assembly
prevents the return of a bill, the bill and the Governor’s
objections shall be filed with the Secretary of State within
such 60 calendar days. The Secretary of State shall return
the bill and objections to the originating house promptly
upon the next meeting of the same General Assembly at which
the bill can be considered.
(c) The house to which a bill is returned shall
immediately enter the Governor’s objections upon its journal.
If within 15 calendar days after such entry that house by a
record vote of three-fifths of the members elected passes the
bill, it shall be delivered immediately to the second house.
If within 15 calendar days after such delivery the second
house by a record vote of three-fifths of the members elected
passes the bill, it shall become law.
(d) The Governor may reduce or veto any item of
appropriations in a bill presented to him. Portions of a bill
not reduced or vetoed shall become law. An item vetoed shall
be returned to the house in which it originated and may
become law in the same manner as a vetoed bill. An item
reduced in amount shall be returned to the house in which it
originated and may be restored to its original amount in the
same manner as a vetoed bill except that the required record
vote shall be a majority of the members elected to each
house. If a reduced item is not so restored, it shall become
law in the reduced amount.
“
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 10:31 am:
s, that’s why I highlighted the same thing that you pointed out. Not sure of your point here.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 10:38 am:
Also, s, are you sure you’re a reporter as you claimed to be the other day? Your IP address would seem to contradict your claim.
- Huh? - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 11:05 am:
Why is the assistant secretary of transportation talking about health care? Shouldn’t he be an advocate for his own agency?
I heard phelps talk last year at a convention, he should have stuck to gospel singing.
- s - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 11:09 am:
I was just providing the full reference for you, I wasn’t making any other point.
And you of all people would know that an IP shows where you are posting from, not who you work for.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 11:11 am:
Right, but when it’s an IP address for the state of Illinois, it makes me wonder, since there is no wireless router at the press room.
- Herself - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 12:13 pm:
I don’t understand why the Assistant Secretary of transportation is discussing health care. Since this is not in Phelp’s line of work, did he put in a leave slip for the press conference? Was it during state time?
- Chicago Cynic - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 12:34 pm:
While I generally think Rod has been a putz in how he has dealt with Madigan and the entire general assembly for that matter, this would seem the exception. I don’t know which constitution Steve Brown has been reading as ours is pretty expicit without much room for interpretation. It’s pretty clear it refers to appropriations.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 12:35 pm:
If Blagojevich is really counting days, someone should let him know it has been 103 days since he and the GA has let us down.
Let him wait.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 12:36 pm:
Or how about US suing him?
- Muskrat - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 12:53 pm:
Interesting… I think the Governor has a good arugment, based on the clear text and the constitutional convention record, that the clerk lacks discretion to hold off. But he may lose on the issue of effect — the clerk’s actions have no effect, because the agreed parts of the bill already became law, and the vetoed parts are not law. The fact that they might later be made into law by the leg is not really an issue– all sorts of things might get made into laws at a future date. Letting the veto sit hardly causes any harm to any party — no funds have their legal status made unclear. I can’t wait to see the legal reply, but he could lose on that point alone.
p.s. note he’s asking that the veto be recorded as if it had been done on Sep. 14, which would mean the veto stands unless overridden by the 19th…and since the reply and judgment will take at least that long, there would be no chance for the hosue or senate to act (not that they would).
- what.... - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 12:54 pm:
Maybe Singing Dave could just sing that Blago did it for the working man…
sorry I get ill every time I think of Dave singing anything.
- So Ill, who is now No Ill, but still Ill - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 2:51 pm:
I haven’t been there in a month, but my recollection is that John Bradley has been invited to very, very few of the “Governor’s” press conferences in the last few months/years. VERY few. As in, about the same number as Murphysboro representative Mike Bost (Republican).
- AsAMom - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 3:33 pm:
As I read it… b) upon recess or adjournment… it shall be read upon the next meeting of the General Assembly…. It does not say the next meeting of the chamber of origin - To me, the term “General Assembly” implies both chambers.
- IDOT peon - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 4:13 pm:
I’m with Huh? and Herself. Why is the Asst. Sec. of Transportation stumping for the political agenda of the Gov. rather than the needs of the Dept he supposedly represents. Would it be an inappropriate use of a state vehicle for him to attend this conference in his IDOT assigned vehicle? Think I could get away with it?
- annon - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 4:18 pm:
Just in !! “Citizens of Illinois” in a class action effort sue Blago for failure to lead !! When in the hell is this going to end…..hoping before Jan. 2011.
- Reddbyrd - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 4:31 pm:
Looks like Brown nailed Team GRod again
If the 15 day gibberish applied the sections would have been labelled A(1), etc not A., B., etc..
Each stands on its own. Wonder which judge gets to do the smackdown on this one?
- Mr. W,T.Rush - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 4:40 pm:
Phelps was just trying to protect all the kinfolk spots on the payroll
- Thunder 2 - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 5:38 pm:
I read the Southern Illinoisan Newspaper that stated David Phelps, assistant IDOT secretary, spoke against Rep Bradley and the programs that he requested funds for, happen to be Meals on Wheels that is a excellent program and is so much needed in Southern Illinois. David Phelps should be ashamed of himself for making statements against Rep Bradley and his programs. What is the deal with these Democrats bashing other Democrats? I don’t know which party is worse….
- Huh? - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 7:17 pm:
Regarding the comment from IDOT Peon, I think a FOIA request is in order for any leave requests and vehicle usage sheets for the singer. Abuse of state equipment and misappropration of state resources is/should be a punishable offence.
Oh wait, I forgot, ASOT works for blago instead of IDOT.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 8:59 pm:
FYI - IDOT has suspended answering FOIA’s. I don’t know how they can get away with it, but they have not answered any FOIA’s for salary since the beginning of the summer. (Maybe, IDOT does not want to show all of the (huge) pay raises that only certain people were able to obtain.)
- Long Term - Wednesday, Sep 12, 07 @ 10:22 pm:
If the Senate goes back next week (not sure if that is going to happen since the mass trans issue looks like it will be postponed)does this mean they will have to read all of the vetos of bills originated in their chamber into the journal and the 15 day clock starts ticking? I think there are at least 30 bills they would have to consider.