Althoff Makes Top Donations List

The Illinois Sunshine Project keeps track of big political contributions.

In its top donations in the last week feature, the Chicago Land Operaters Jt Labor Management PAC is cited for kicking in $52,900 to State Senator Pam Althoff’s campaign fund.

The biggest was Midwest Operating Engineers Construction Industry Research and Service transferring to the Political Action Committee which donated to Althoff.

Althoff top fdonations for the week 3-22-16
Just under two weeks before the Primary Election, Althoff gave $40,000 to Carolyn Schofield’s State Rep. campaign.


Althoff Makes Top Donations List — 29 Comments

  1. Two comments about the recent election:

    Thank you, Paul, for wisely withdrawing from the race to ensure a Schofield loss.

    Thank you, Tina for running to make it possible for Joe to win.

    Observation: This past committeeman cycle, John Jung chose Tina Hill for committeeman of the year award.

    Now that Tina was defeated by Joe Monack will be replacing Tina, will John have competition for Township Chairman?

  2. The Midwest Operating Engineers (MOE) Construction Industry Research and Trust Fund is an International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local 150 fringe benefit fund.

    The fund is an hourly fringe benefit of, let’s pick a number, 25 cents per hour, or the negotiated rate.

    Most or all fringe benefits, one would think, go from the employer to the Union Fund and stay there, until the funds are expended on the service applicable to the fund.

    But in the case of the Construction Industry Research and Trust Fund, a considerable amount of money seems to go to political campaigns.

    The core traditional membership of the IUOE is heavy equipment operators, although they are diversified into other trades, crafts, and positions.

    The Construction Industry Research and Trust Fund hourly amount can be found in the negotiated collective bargaining agreement between the union and the employer, which in the case of building and construction unions, such as IUOE, is often an organization which negotiates the agreement on behalf of a group of multiple employers.

    So one would have to look at the collective bargaining agreement for work done on Federal, State, and Locally fund road construction projects and other projects to determine if the line item appears for taxpayer funded government construction work.

  3. I have a basic question, I don’t mean to sound uninformed, please help me here:

    I guess that I thought that Rauner and the Republicans in the state legislature are trying to curtail the influence of the unions and their pensions.

    Why is our State Senator garnishing HUGE donations from unions?

    Shouldn’t she refrain from that?

    What do those unions expect from her in return?

    Why was Carolyn Schofields campaign sustained by the donations from the teachers and operating engineers union?

  4. You people keep electing these Union schoolteachers, whose only ability is to spend other people’s money.

    Go down to her office and see all the honorariums and assorted drivel, pasted on her walls, paid for with your taxes as proof.

    Althoff is nothing more than an opportunistic Democrat

  5. The unions contribute more money to Republican candidates than the general public realizes.

    And the unions have a lot of money for political expenditures.

    Some private sector union dues check-off funds are used for political purposes, funneled from unions to union PACs.

    Public sector employees have to opt in to contribute to a PAC for political contributions.

    Keeping in mind the contributions from unions to political candidates while reading the 38 page document “Illinois Turnaround” one better understands the dilemma of achieving the goals outlined in the Turnaround Agenda.

    The IUOE often wants support and funding for road construction projects.

    The IEA often wants no pension reform and more money for public education.

    The political power of the unions spreads across both parties in Illinois.

    One problem is it has resulted in underfunded pension and retiree healthcare legislation to pension and retiree healthcare systems that were already underfunded, which has contributed greatly to unsustainable pensions and retiree healthcare.

  6. Until the Citizens United decision was rendered, union political contributions grew and grew and grew while the private sector was restricted with limits.

    Now at least we have some private sector (non-union) money flowing into campaigns.

    Locally, this election you saw the two sides actively trying to outspend each other.

    One group (private sector) supporting Skillicorn, the other group (unions) supporting Schofield.

    To win an election you need a ‘fair’ (does not have to outstanding) candidate and lotsa money!!

    This election saw a lot of money spent by both sides of the political spectrum.

    The race for the 66th Legislative District was peanuts compared to the race for 5th district where over $5,000,000 was spent and even the occupant of the White House got involved!

    Unions won in the 5th but lost in the 66th.

    Unless we can find a millionaire to run against Althoff or we can get a person who has the ear of someone like Dan Proft – voters in Althoff’s district are stuck with her because it appears to me she is bought and paid for.

  7. So is this some kind of a legal money laundering scheme?

    The union wants to donate to a candidate (Schofield), but doesn’t want the candidate to be tainted by the disclosure that the union donated a large sum of money to that candidate.

    So they donate it to another, friendly candidate (Althoff), who then transfers it on to the union’s intended recipient (Schofield).

    The money is now “clean” because it now has the appearance that it came from a fellow republican candidate.

  8. Union contributes to Union PAC 1 who contributes to Union PAC 2 who contribute to candidate 1 who contributes to candidate 2, that actually happens.

  9. Just another Reason to pass TERM LIMITS!

    We have term limits.

    They’re called elections.

    If you want Althoff out that badly, you should have found someone to primary her.

    But good luck with that – her district likes her, even if the few people on this blog don’t.

  10. We need term limits for people like Jack Franks and Michael Madigan.

    45 years is too long for Michael Madigan to be State Representative and 30 years as House Speaker.

    We have term limit for President of the United States, at least in practice, 8 years.

    Even doubling that to 16 years, or 14 years, or 12 years, or 10 years, maybe something in that range.

    And it makes no sense for the House Majority leader to also be in charge of the party campaign fund, some kind of reform about party leaders and campaign politcal funds.

    There are plenty of other reforms in Turnaround Illinois and the Turnatound Agenda, but Michael Madigan resisted them all to date, none have passed.

    Plenty of Democrats would like to see Michael Madigan out of office.

    He has been able to control the political system to his benefit at the expense of the good of the Peoole of Illinois.

    We need sustainable state finances, it should not have been possible to pass all the unfunded mandate hikes so easily without full awareness of taxpayers, without a funding stream.

    But a reform such as what is in place at some unions would do no good either.

    Where the President and Treasurer just switch spots every 4 years because there is a term limit.

    Our state is a mess.

  11. The argument that elections are the only form of term limits we need has become a false argument.

    Before we saw over $5,000,000 spent in a PRIMARY for a State Representative’s seat, I would have agreed with you.

    An incumbent has a definite advantage in every election because the carpetbaggers will fund a known entity versus an unknown.

    We live in a society where elections are being bought.

    As a consequence, I do now support term limits.

    Just look at the money thrown at Sam McCann (a Republican) by the unions because Sam will not support some of Rauner’s agenda.

    Just look at the money thrown at Ken Dunkin (a Democrat) by Rauner because Ken does support some of Rauner’s agenda.

    BTW Ken lost but Sam won.

    Unfortunately we do need term limits because we have entered an age of career politicians.

  12. Republican Senator Sam McCann (Jacksonville – 50th District) voted against Rauner’s wishes so was targeted.

    Democrat State Representative Ken Dunkin (Chicago – 5th District – “from the Gold Coast to the Soul Coast”) on the other hand was not so much about Dunkin supporting Rauner as it was Dunkin standing up for what he (Dunkin) believed which happened on a particular vote to be against Madigan’s wishes, so Madigan targeted him for extinction.

    The Republicans and a few PACs wanted to support a Democrat voting against Madigan’s wishes.

    Obviously the Republicans and the Conservative PACs didn’t know enough about the district.

    Dunkin wanted off the plantation.

    He found out Madigan still owns the plantation.

    Dunkin said he doesn’t work for Mike Madigan.

    Now Dunkin won’t have a job as a Democrat State Representative.


    The bill in question was Senate Bill 1229 in the 99th General Assembly.

    SB 1229 passed the General Assembly, Governor Rauner vetoed the bill, the State House of Representatives failed to override the Governors veto, obtaining 68 of the 71 needed votes.

    Democrat Ken Dunkin did not vote, Democrat Scott Drury (Highwood – 58th District) voted no, and Democrat Jack Franks (Marengo – 63rd District) voted present.

    The present vote by Jack Franks was safe since Representative Dunkin was not present to vote.

    Obviously Michael Madigan had something in mind when calling the bill to vote, since Dunkin’s absence meant the override would fail, perhaps the March 15th, 2016 primary election was what he had in mind.

  13. Once again, Mark is so very wrong.

    Democrat State Representative Ken Dunkin (Chicago – 5th District – “from the Gold Coast to the Soul Coast”) on the other hand was not so much about Dunkin supporting Rauner as it was Dunkin standing up for what he (Dunkin) believed which happened on a particular vote to be against Madigan’s wishes, so Madigan targeted him for extinction.

    This is fundamentally wrong, and shows a complete and utter lack of understanding of what happened.

    One, it is ABSOLUTELY about Rauner.

    Two, it wasn’t just one bill.

    It wasn’t just the interest arbitration bill, but also an extremely important vote on a Child Care bill and a Home Care bill.

    Dunkin refused to vote with the rest of the Dems (and his constituents), and instead voted with Rauner.

    The Republicans and a few PACs wanted to support a Democrat voting against Madigan’s wishes.

    LOL – a “few PACs”. It was actually one PAC, with Rauner behind it, as well as a bunch of money funneled through Proft’s dark money Illinois Opportunity Project and given directly to Dunkin.

  14. Ken Dunkin’s primary interest was his constituency, not Rauner.


    Here is is an audio clip of Ken Dunkin talking to Dan Proft and Amy Jacobson, the post is dated January 29, 2016.

    Upstream Ideas – Connecting the Dots – Renegade Dem State Rep. Ken Dunkin Wants off Madigan’s “Plantation”


    Ken Dunkin is a Democrat, not a Republican.

    Michael Madigan’s primary problem with Ken Dunkin was Ken Dunkin did not do what Michael Madigan wanted Ken Dunkin to do.

    So Michael Madigan targeted Ken Dunkin for extinction and succeeded in the March 15, 2016 primary for the 5th State Representative District.

    Michael Madigan controls 4 PACs, he’s the leader of the Illinois Democrat Party, he’s precinct committeeman in his precinct, he’s the House Speaker (#1 position in the Illinois State House of Representatives) since 1983 except for 1995 & 1996 (when Lee Daniels was House Speaker), he was first elected to the State Rep office in 1970 taking office in 1971.

    Michael Madigan is the most powerful politician in Illinois.

    Ken Dunkin will be gone after completing his term in early January 2017 when the 100th General Assembly takes office, because Michael Madigan wanted Ken Dunkin gone.


    Another Democrat game was Jeffery Lichte, the Democrat and Jack Franks supporter.

    Jack Franks is current Democrat 63rd District State Representative.

    Jeffery Lichte ran as Republican candidate 63rd District State Representative in the March 15, 2016 primary election.

    Mr. Lichte’s opponent was Republican Steve Reick.

    Mr. Reick prevailed.

    Then after the March 15, 2016 primary election, Jack Franks announced he would not seek re-election as 63rd District State Representative, but rather as Democrat McHenry County Board Chair, against Republican Mike Walkup.

    Democrats and Democrat contributors supported Jeffery Lichte in a well orchestrated campaign.

    Four months later, in a July 28, 2016 story on McHenry County Blog, Mr. Skinner posted a picture of Jeffery Lichte in a Jack Franks hat driving a vehicle supporting Jack Franks in the July 24, 2016 McHenry Fiesta Days parade.

  15. **Ken Dunkin’s primary interest was his constituency, not Rauner**


    Than why did his constituents OVERWHELMINGLY tell him, “Thanks, but go away!”

    He clearly chose the side of Rauner over his constituents. And he has been telling everyone that he will be lobbying and making a ton of money because Rauner will get him contracts.

    But go ahead and believe whatever you want.

    There is one key lesson to learn from the 2016 primaries – don’t vote against your constituents.

    Dunkin voted against his constituents, and despite massive Rauner-tied money supporting him, got crushed.

    Sam McCann voted WITH his constituents, and despite Rauner-tied money opposing him, beat Bryce Benton.

    I get what you WANT to be true, and WHY you want it to be true.

    But the facts don’t back you up at all.

  16. Ken Dunkin voted for his constituency.

    The Madigan Chicago Cook County Democrat machine spun a story that shed Dunkin in a bad light and a bunch of heavy weights endorsed his opponent Stratton, most prominently the President of the United States, Barack Obama.


    Let’s look Rep. Dunkin’s voting voting on three bills that upset Michael Madigan on September 2 & November 10, 2015.


    Senate Bill 1229 (SB 1229).

    Illinois General Assembly (ILGA) Roll Call (vote) on September 2, 2015.

    Here are 3 key Democrats for that roll call.

    Dunkin was Absent, said Madigan knew he was not present when calling the bill for a vote.

    Franks voted Present.

    Drury voted no.

    Paris Schutz wrote an article September 4, 2014 for WTTW Chicago Tonight titled, “State Rep. Dunkin: I Don’t Work for Michael Madigan.”

    Here is a video clip from September 8, 2015 on WTTW Chicago Tonight where Democrat 5th District State Representative Ken Dunkin (Chicago) and Democrat 58th District State Representative Scott Drury (Highwood) discuss their no votes on changing collective bargaining laws in SB 1229.

    WTTW Chicago Tonight
    Labor Bill Veto Override Falls 3 Votes Short
    by Alexandra Silets
    September 8, 2015
    Includes video.


    SB 1229 was about collective bargaining.

    The reason for the bill is Madigan wanted to strip negotiating power away from the elected Governor and turn it over to an unelected team of arbitrators.

    It was an unnecessary bill.

    No one was calling for such a bill prior to the Republican Governor negotiating with AFSCME.

    The Governor has successfully negotiated with other labor unions this term.

    Collective bargaining law is already very strong with well established precedent cases in Illinois.

    No one was claiming Illinois collective bargaining law to heavily favored management; if anything the opposite.

    SB 1229 would have removed the right to strike, removed the Governor from an impasse in negotiations, and added mandated arbitration to resolve an impasse.

    That is very strange.

    Can you imagine if the Republican’s had proposed removing the right to strike, there would have been immediate union outrage, protests, demonstrations, press conferences, and social media uproar.

    But Democrat Madigan proposes it, nothing close to that.

    It seems SB 1229 was a short term fix to allow an arbitrator to resolve the impasse between the AFSCME union and the Executive branch of the State of Illinois.

    Even when strikes were illegal in Illinois, unions illegally struck anyways sometimes, so who knows maybe there would have been an illegal strike.

    Plus, if passed, after Governor Rauner leaves office, what’s next, reverse the law?

  17. The Governor’s veto on House Bill 2482 follows.

    The attempted overrides follow the Governors message.

    “November 6, 2015

    Governor Bruce Rauner Issues Amendatory Veto


    Governor Bruce Rauner issued an amendatory veto today of House Bill 2482.

    Similar to Senate Bill 570 (the proposed legislation concerning the Child Care Assistance Program), HB 2482 would have unintended consequences that would negatively impact the state’s long-term ability to serve individuals in need.

    “These bills may be well-intentioned, but they are ultimately harmful to the programs they are trying to help,” Rauner spokesman Lance Trover said.

    “The governor understands and shares the frustration of members who want to fund these programs, but the appropriate way to do so is in the context of a truly balanced budget.

    As drafted, both pieces of legislation would create serious problems that jeopardize the future of the Child Care Assistance Program as well as services for the elderly.”

    House Bill 2482 would lock into statute that an individual who qualifies for assistance is entitled to institutional care.

    Additionally, the approach contemplated by this legislation puts the state’s compliance with Medicaid waiver regulations and ability to maximize federal match funds at serious risk.

    As noted in the governor’s veto message House Bill 2482 “takes a step in the wrong direction… For too long, Illinois has over-prescribed institutional care to lower-need individuals when less expensive and more appropriate care options are available.

    In order to provide the best particular care for each individual, to ensure that our support services remain affordable, and to maximize the number of individuals served, we must rebalance the services being provided with greater precision.

    Prescribing institutional care for individuals who do not need it is wrong for the individual and wrong for taxpayers.

    Moreover, over-prescribing institutional care is inconsistent with the direction being taken across the country.”

    Bill No.: HB 2482
    An Act Concerning Public Aid
    Action: Amendatory Veto
    Note: Veto Message Below

    Veto Message
    To the Honorable Members of
    The Illinois Senate,
    99th General Assembly:

    Today I return House Bill 2482 with specific recommendations for change.

    The State of Illinois provides important support services to elderly and disabled individuals through the Community Care Program, the Home Services Program, and State-funded nursing care. At a time when the State is struggling to afford its past promises, we have an obligation to make the economic and government reforms needed to continue providing these services to the neediest among us.

    Unfortunately, while well-intentioned, House Bill 2482 takes a step in the wrong direction.

    The bill would lock into statute that an individual with a particular threshold score on the Determination of Need (DON) assessment tool would be eligible for both institutional and home and community-based long term care services.

    Instead, an individual with the threshold score should be entitled to institutional or home and community-based care.

    Retaining flexibility to determine whether an individual is eligible for institutional or home and community-based care – as opposed to both – will ensure that the State is compliant with Medicaid waiver regulations and protocols and maximize federal matching funds.

    For too long, Illinois has over-prescribed institutional care to lower-need individuals when less expensive and more appropriate care options are available.

    In order to provide the best particular care for each individual, to ensure that our support services remain affordable, and to maximize the number of individuals served, we must rebalance the services being provided with greater precision.

    Prescribing institutional care for individuals who do not need it is wrong for the individual and wrong for taxpayers. Moreover, over-prescribing institutional care is inconsistent with the direction being taken across the country.

    Therefore, pursuant to Article IV, Section 9(e) of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return House Bill 2482, entitled “AN ACT concerning public aid”, with the following specific recommendations for change:

    On page 10, line 17, by replacing “institutional and” with “institutional or”; and
    On page 21, line 5, by replacing “institutional and” with “institutional or”; and
    On page 50, line 21, by replacing “institutional and” with “institutional or”; and
    On page 55, line 17, by replacing “institutional and” with “institutional or”.

    With these changes, House Bill 2482 will have my approval. I respectfully request your concurrence.


    Bruce Rauner

  18. Governor’s Office

    November 9, 2015

    Statement on Senate Bill 570

    Springfield –

    Governor’s office spokesman Lance Trover released the following statement regarding Senate Bill 570:

    “As a result of bipartisan discussions with legislators concerning the future of the Child Care Assistance Program, the Rauner administration today plans to amend the emergency rule it filed at the beginning of the fiscal year.

    Under the amended rule, income eligibility will rise to 162% of the federal poverty level while current co-pays will remain intact.

    Other eligibility and restrictions will also be lifted pending further review and legislative consultation.

    Additionally, the governor’s office will establish a bipartisan, bicameral task force aimed at ensuring the long-term stability of the program.

    The governor’s office thanks the serious, good-faith negotiations by members of the legislature who made today’s announcement a reality.

    This bipartisan agreement will allow us to avoid the unintended consequences and costs that SB 570 would have brought.

    By working together, we will be able to bring financial stability to an important program valued by members of both parties.”


    Senate Bill 570 (SB 570)

    ILGA Roll Call November 10, 2015.

    Not Voting (NV): Dunkin.

    Child care funding and eligibility in the Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP), which is an Illinois Department of Human Services program.

    Discussed in the video below.

    Representative Duncan worked out a deal which would restore child care funding to 85% of the previous level (which had been hiked over time) with the Governor and the Sponsor of the bill was aware.


    House Bill 2482 (HB 2482)

    ILGA Roll Call November 10, 2015.

    Dunkin did not vote (NV).


    Illinois Watchdog

    Rauner announces deal on child care

    by Illinois News Network

    November 10, 2015


    Illinois News Network

    High drama in the State House as Democrats call Senate Bill 570

    November 11, 2015

    by Cole Lauterbach

    – Democrat State Senator Toi Hutchinson (Chicago Heights) agreed to hold the bill in her chamber.

    – But, Democrat State Representative Jehan Gordon-Booth (Peoria) instead called the bill for vote.


    Rauner, Dunkin, and Hutchinson had a deal.

    Gordon-Booth and Madigan did not buy in and went forward with a Roll Call during which Dunkin did not vote.


  19. WTTW Chicago Tonight
    November 11, 2015
    State Rep. Ken Dunkin Breaks Ranks With Democrats Again
    by Nick Blumberg

    Includes 2 videos.


    Here is a quote from the Chicago Sun-Times that sheds some insight on the Madigan – union stranglehold over Illinois government.

    Chicago Sun-Times
    House Democrats fail to pass bill on child care that GOP dubbed ‘gotcha politics’
    by Tina Sfondeles

    “‘Let me be clear that no one bears more responsibility today for the defeat of this legislation, which protects our children and child care and home care in Illinois than Rep. Ken Dunkin himself,’ Jaquie Algee, vice president of SEIU Healthcare Illinois said at a press conference organized by House Speaker Michael Madigan.”


    February 10, 2016

    Barack Obama makes a speech in the Illinois General Assembly.

    During a February 10, 2016 speech in the Illinois General Assembly, President Barack Obama interrupted his speech to address Ken Dunkin.

    Here is the excerpt:

    “But here’s the point I want to make.

    I believe that there are a lot of Republicans who share many of these same values, even though they may disagree with me on the means to achieve them.

    I think sometimes my Republican colleagues make constructive points about outdated regulations that may need to be changed, or programs that even though well-intended, didn’t always work the way they were supposed to.

    And where I’ve got an opportunity to find some common ground, that doesn’t make me a sellout to my own party.

    That applies … the same … well, we’ll talk later, Dunkin, you just sit down.”

    The version of the speech on the White House website misspells Dunkin’s name, spelling Duncan not Dunkin.

    The version of the speech on the White House website does not mention that President Obama told Dunkin to sit down.

    Here is what President Obama actually said:

    “…Well, we’ll talk later Duncan, you just sit down.”

    Here is the version on the White House website:

    “That applies — (laughter) — well, we’ll talk later, Duncan. (Applause.) This is what happens, everybody starts cherry-picking.”

    A video of the speech is on several YouTube sites, just Google.


    Ken Dunkin was not able to get the message out to his constituents about the reasons for his votes.

    Rather he was drowned out by the Madigan / Democrat / union machine.

    Democrat US President Barack Obama endorsed Ken Dunkin’s opponent, Democrat Juliana Stratton, including TV ads on her behalf in the 5th District State Representative primary election on March 15, 2016.

    It is unusual for a Democrat US President to endorse a Democrat State Representative in a Democrat primary.

    The President Obama endorsement for Julianna Stratton occurred on March 7, 2016, just 8 days prior to the March 15, 2016 election.

    Does that date ring a bell?


  20. March 7, 2015 was the day that Government for the People independent expenditure committee (IE) filed a D-1 Statement of Organization form with the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) to support Jeffery Lichte (a Democrat who ran as a Republican in the March 15, 2015 primary) and oppose Steve Reick in the March 15, 2015 Republican Primary for 63rd State Representative.

    The very next day, on March 8, 2015, the Illinois Education Association (IEA) teacher union political action committee (PAC) named Illinois Political Action Committee for Education (IPACE) sent a $12,500 contribution to Government for the People at the address of Shaw Decremer, former top Michael Madigan campaign aide, and current lobbyist who also does campaign work.


    Julian Stratton refused to sit down with the Chicago Tribune Editorial Board.

    Ken Dunkin’s voting on legislation was against the wishes of Michael Madigan, so Ken Dunkin was punished.


    Michael Madigan has the ability financially through his power, through the PACs he controls, through the Democrat machine, to slate an opponent candidate in the primary.

    Michael J Madigan is the Chairman of four active political action committees (PACs) registered with the Illinois State Board of Elections (ISBE):

    – Democratic Party of Illinois (ISBE committee ID 6239), Treasurer is Michael J Kasper.
    – Democratic Majority (ISBE committee ID 23189), Treasurer is Timothy D Mapes.
    – 13th Ward Democratic Org (ISBE committee ID 10), Treasurer is Frank Olivo.
    – Friends of Michael J Madigan (ISBE committee ID 665), Treasurer is Timothy Mapes.


    A conservative PAC did financially contribute to the Ken Dunkin campaign, but there was no ground game (get out the vote) for the March 15, 2016 primary to match the Madigan Chicago Cook County Democrat machine which has a stronghold in Chicago.

    Ken Dunkin had a messaging and ground game problem in that primary election.


    WTTW Chicago Tonight
    March 9, 2016
    by Paris Schutz
    Election 2016
    Rogue Representative Dunkin Fights for Political Life
    Includes video.
    Includes picture of large sign on tractor trailer, “Vote Against Republican Bruce Rauner and Sellout Kenneth Dunkin. Paid for by Friends of Julian Stratton.”


    Barack Obama and Ken Dunkin have known each other from their days at the University of Chicago, before they were legislators.

    Public Affairs with Jeff Berkowitz – Ken Dunkin
    August 26, 2008


    Remember HB 2482 from above.

    It resurfaced in another bill.

    On July 29, 2016 Governor Rauner vetoed House Bill 4351 (HB 4351).

    From the Governor’s office:

    “Today I veto House Bill 4351 from the 99th General Assembly, which would amend the Illinois Act on Aging to restrict the State’s flexibility in how we assess and serve Illinois’s elderly and physically disabled residents.

    This bill is very similar to House Bill 2482, passed by the General Assembly last year, and which I returned with an amendatory veto for many of the same concerns I raise today.

    Although well intentioned, this bill would lead to serious unintended consequences.

    First, this bill would lock into statute that an individual with a particular threshold score on the Determination of Need (DON) assessment tool would be eligible for both institutional and home and community-based long term care services.

    Instead, an individual with the threshold score should be entitled to institutional or home and community-based care.

    Many members of the General Assembly have long worked to transition the state from a reliance on institutional-based care to a focus on community care options that improve patient quality and cost efficiency.

    However, House Bill 4351 inhibits this transformation in the way the State delivers services for the elderly and disabled.

    Second, to the extent that a motivating factor behind this legislation is to preclude a raise in the minimum DON score used to determine eligibility—as originally contemplated under the SMART Act (Public Act 97-0689)—I have no intention of raising the DON score.

    In light of this commitment, there can be no good reason to unnecessarily restrict the State’s ability to move from institutional-based care to community-based care through this legislation.

    Finally, this bill would inhibit the Illinois Department on Aging from creating a new program, the Community Reinvestment Program (CRP).

    This program is designed to provide a multitude of flexible services for non-Medicaid individuals currently being served under the Community Care Program (CCP), and it furthers the State’s commitment to serving individuals in their own home and community rather than in nursing homes.

    CRP is also projected to produce savings of nearly $200 million during the next fiscal year.

    By precluding the launch of CRP, this bill would prevent the State from managing ever-rising costs and jeopardize our ability to ensure that essential community services remain available for the approximately 44,000 non-Medicaid persons now served by CCP.”


  21. Mark – believe whatever you want, whether is true or not.

    But you seriously have no clue about what you’re talking about.

    And you definitely have no clue about Dunkin’s district.

    Dunkin voted against his district.

    He lost.

  22. 5th District State Representative Kenneth Dunkin voted in the best interests of his constituents, which happened to be against the wishes of Democrat State of Representatives House Speaker Michael J Madigan, the most powerful politician in Illinois.

    Representative Kenneth Dunkin was obliterated by the Chicago Cook County Democrat machine in retaliation and those participating in the effort included Democrat President Barack Obama.

    February 10, 2016: During a speech to the Illinois General Assembly (State House and Senate), President Obama makes a comment about bipartisanship that prompts Ken Dunkin to stand up.

    That should have come as no surprise since Representative Dunkin received high profile accusations in the preceding months of selling out to his party for his (Dunkin’s) bipartisanship efforts in HB 2482 & SB 0570 in the 99th General Assembly.

    President Obama then says to Ken Dunkin, “…we’ll talk later, Dunkin, you just sit down.”

    Flash forward one month later.

    March 7, 2016: President Obama endorses Kenneth Dunkin’s opponent, Juliana Stratton, in a Democrat State primary election.

    It’s unusual for a President to get involved in a state primary race.

    March 15, 2016: Juliana Stratton defeats Ken Dunkin in the Democrat 5th District State Representative primary election.


    The bills which Ken Dunkin took heat for involve labor unions who don’t want job positions scaled back even though the state has extreme financial difficulties to the tune of $8 Billion unpaid bills, over $100 Billion unfunded state pensions, and $50 Billion unfunded state retiree healthcare.

    Senate Bill 1229 involves AFSCME Council 31 union and sought to change collective bargaining law, and it’s since been replaced by House Bill 580 (HB 580).

    Senate Bill 570 involves SEIU HCII union and the Department of Human Services (DHS), Family & Community Services (FCS) Division, Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP).

    House Bill 2482 involves SEIU HCII union and the following state agencies:

    – the DHS Division of Rehabilitation Services (DRS), Home Services Program (HSP)

    – the Department of Aging (DOA), Community Care Program (CCP)

    – the Department of Healthcare & Family Services (DHFS), Support Living Facilities Program (SLFP);

    and it’s been replaced with House Bill 4351 (HB 4351).

    DHS, DRS, DOA, & DHFS are major state agencies in the executive branch of Illinois State government.

    Governor Rauner is in the Executive Branch.

    The State Reps and Senators are in the Illinois General Assembly (ILGA) the Legislative Branch.

    It’s been past hikes with no corresponding revenue and out of control spending that has gotten us into this mess, and of course once something is hiked, no one wants to see it scaled back.

    Representative Dunkin was trying to be realistic.

    That doesn’t sit to well with Madigan whose concerned with power and tax hikes to sustain the mess he’s been instrumental in creating.

  23. LOL – okay. He cut a deal with Rauner, ignoring his district and their wants/needs. He thought Rauner and friends’ millions would protect him.

    But his constituents voted against him. By a wide margin.

  24. 5th District (Chicago) Democrat State Representative Kenneth Dunkin voted for his constituents as he has since 2002.

    The problem is the Democrats are refusing just about any reform, so Ken Dunkin decided to get the Republican’s side of the story, he kept the Senate Sponsor informed in doing so, but that was not good enough for the Democrat machine, so Ken Dunkin was extinguished by his own party.

    Since 2002 there was no uproar that Ken Dunkin wasn’t serving his constituents.

    Until now.

    The history above exposes the Democrats don’t want compromise or scaling back of benefits and jobs that have been hiked over time, irregardless of current affordability.

    The hikes have resulted in unsustainable (at current taxes) union jobs at state agencies and government funded non profits.

    The hikes have resulted in hiking all sorts of government benefits.

    The only way to make them sustainable is to hike taxes.

    There is a consistent pattern in the Illinois General Assembly of creating financially unsustainable laws.

    Many of these jobs and government benefits were unsustainable from the time they were created as the result of legislation.

    That has been going on for decades in Springfield with State Representatives and Senators and Governors creating laws that don’t have appropriate funding.

    Cut a job or freebie, and of course the union employees and government benefit recipients will be upset and will stir up a frenzy among the public and media.

    Well there’s only so much money.

    The story of Ken Dunkin’s demise is the story of punishing those in the party who don’t follow the agenda, irregardless if the agenda doesn’t include the best interest of taxpayers.

    The history is above.

    It seems the main priority of Michael Madigan and the unions is to hike taxes and vote Governor Rauner out of office after his first term of 2015 – 2018, and compromise at least before the November 2016 election is not part of the plan.

    Their claim is the State’s financial woes are a revenue problem, ignoring they haven’t had a truly balanced budget for years while simultaneously creating unfunded mandates through legislation.


    Dunkin exposed the Democrats in that instance did not want bipartisanship negotiations not controlled by Democrat leaders (Dunkin is not an officer in the 99th Illinois General Assembly).

    Dunkin was doing his job in getting to the bottom of the story.


    How about sustainable “green” legislation instead of unfunded mandates indebting taxpayers.

    How about properly explaining each unfunded state law created.

    How about truly balanced budgets.

    That’s at the heart of the problems we are in.

    Jack Franks was part of that yet he claims he’s never voted for a tax hike.

    That’s Jack Franks math.

    Why did the Democrats target Ken Dunkin instead of fellow House Republicans Jack Franks or Scott Drury?


    There is a story behind many House Bills, Senate Bills, and Public Acts created in this state, including the above.

    The story involves understanding:

    – the government unit impacted

    – the union local impacted

    – any jobs and current or retiree employee benefits created

    – any new or enhanced government benefits / freebies created for the poor / needy etc.

    – any unfunded mandates created

  25. Here are the unions involved in the legislation above.

    AFSCME Council 31 American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees Council 31

    SEIU HCII = Service Employees International Union Healthcare Illinois Indiana

    These unions endorsed Ken Dunkin in plenty of past election cycles.

    For example, AFSCME Council 31 endorsed Ken Dunkin in the 2014 General Election.

    AFSCME Council 31 and its PAC contributed to Ken Dunkin’s political campaign in 2002, 2004, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2014, & 2015.


    However, in the 2016 election, AFSCME and SEIU reversed course, contributing a combined $261,147 to Juliana Stratton’s campaign (Duncan’s opponent).

    While $261K and the rest of the contributions to Stratton’s campaign were less than what Duncan received, that was drowned out by the union ground game including social media and get out the vote, the President of the United States telling Dunkin to sit down during his speech when Dunkin raised to clap about the President’s call for bipartisanship, and the President’s endorsement of Stratton.

    So the President can be bipartisan but the State Representative Dunkin cannot.


    A Democrat PAC, IllinoisGO IE PAC (Illinois Growth and Opportunity), contributed to Ken Dunkin’s political campaign in 2016.

    It was (it has since been closed) a reform minded PAC funded by Democrats.

    IllinoisGO IE was an Independent Expenditure (IE) PAC.


    Remember what President Obama said during his February 10, 2016 speech to the Illinois General Assembly.

    “And where I’ve got an opportunity to find some common ground, that doesn’t make me a sellout to my own party.”

    That is exactly what Ken Dunkin was trying to do.

    He was trying to find common ground.

    Instead he got labeled a sellout by those wanting to extinguish him.

    Dunkin stood up after that comment, then the president told him to sit down.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *