Progress Illinois

When back in the 13th Congressional District, Rep. Judy Biggert sure likes to praise the result of bills she opposed on Capitol Hill.

Earlier this year, the Hinsdale Republican lauded two transportation projects in her district that were funded through an appropriations bill she had voted against. Then in early October, she called for a six-month extension of the first-time homebuyer's tax credit -- initially implemented via the federal stimulus bill she vehemently opposed. Yesterday, she went even further, applauding the arrival of two stimulus grants (amounting to $10.9 million) intended to upgrade Naperville's municipal electric utility.

The political opportunism here is self-evident.  In February, just as the stimulus negotiations were wrapping up, Biggert spread lies about a 2007 report on the economic benefits of tax cuts by President Obama’s Economic Council of Advisers Chairwoman Christina Romer and eventually voted against the package. Just this past month, she issued a statement suggesting that "it's long past time for Congress to reject the big-spending approach to recovery that has clearly failed to stimulate job growth or ease the financial burden on struggling families." But then she sayd those stimulus programs directly benefiting her constituents are worthy of federal support?

She can't have it both ways.  And judging from his comments to us over the summer, Democratic challenger Scott Harper plans to drive home this point.

Right on schedule, it appears the House is ready to reform the student loan system, one of President Obama's most important policy priorities. Reports in Washington verify that the House leaders will put the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009 (H.R. 3221) to a full vote as soon as today.

While it faces a tougher road in the Senate, House Democrats are expected to approve the legislation overwhelmingly. That's because the reforms make a ton of economic and moral sense. Currently, the federal government subsidizes the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) program to the tune of $55 billion a year. In turn, private insurance companies administer the loans, which are identical to the government's Direct Loan Program. Even with the government backing, lenders dish out those subsidized loans with high interest rates and massive late fees. Those practices are unjustified, though, considering how little risk the loans carry. After all, even bankrupt  borrowers can't discharge their accumulated debt.

Continue reading »

After a month of boisterous town halls across the country and stalled negotiations on Capitol Hill, President Obama is set to address both chambers of Congress tonight about health care reform. When he takes the podium, he won't face appreciably worse political conditions than when lawmakers left town for their August recess. In some sense, the dynamic has shifted in the Democrats' favor.

Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Finance Committee, has circulated a plan among committee members that he hopes to put up for a vote by next week. While it's much less expansive than other bills being deliberated -- subsidy levels are too low, the employer mandate is too weak, and it does not include a public option -- it could be strengthened before a full Senate floor vote or in conference. Baucus heads the only committee with jurisdiction over health care that hasn't yet passed a bill, so the most important thing to note here is that the wheels are starting to move again on the Hill.

Republicans are furious with this new push. And their latest bogus talking point, floated this morning by Rep. Judy Biggert on WFLD's Good Day Chicago, is that the Democrats are not being sufficiently bipartisan. Watch it (the quote begins about three minues in):

BIGGERT: We on this side have never had a seat at the table. Anything that we have brought up has gone to deaf ears, nor have we even been asked to participate. Bipartisan agreement really has to take into account the things that we think our important. We all care about having everybody have health insurance if they want it. And I think there are certain reforms that need to be made -- the preexisting conditions, the affordability of it that allows people to purchase it, but that’s about as far as we go. Eighty-five percent say they like the health care plan that they have and the President came out in the beginning and said that would be true. In the Education and Labor committee, I offered that amendment to the bill in the markup of the bill and it was unanimously voted down by the other side of the aisle.

It's important to remember that the Democrats do not need Republicans to pass this bill.

Continue reading »

At lunchtime today, teachers across the nation have the opportunity to broadcast a videotaped speech by President Obama urging students to work hard in school and discover their passions. "We need every single one of you to develop your talents, skills and intellect so you can help solve our most difficult problems," Obama says, according to the text of the speech. "If you don't do that -- if you quit on school -- you're not just quitting on yourself, you're quitting on your country."

When word broke of Obama's plans, Rep. Judy Biggert -- like many of her fellow Republicans -- raised irrational concerns that it might amount to political indoctrination. Last week, the Hinsdale Republican issued a statement blasting the White House for failing to make the text of the speech public in advance (the White House did so yesterday):

With no opportunity to review the text of the President’s remarks, it’s little wonder why parents and educators are concerned that the Administration could be sending kids a thinly-veiled political lesson rather than simply encouraging students to fulfill their potential.  Already, I’ve heard from parents who feel compelled to keep their children at home.  This is exactly why the federal government rightfully steers away from dictating educational agendas to local schools.

The SouthtownStar's Phil Kadner has the correct response to this strange fear: "Have we really reached the point where a president's remarks to schoolchildren need to be screened?" 

Continue reading »

The August recess is in full swing. Here's the latest health care news:

More Hedging On The Public Option

The big news nationally is that the White House hinted again yesterday at a willingness to drop a public insurance option from the health care reform packages if it means ultimately passing a bill. While progressives activists have pushed hard for a robust government-run program to compete with private insurers,  Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told CNN that a public option was “not the essential element” for reform. This isn't the first time the Obama administration has hedged on this point, but at this stage in the negotiations, it should send a strong signal to moderate and liberal Democrats where the president currently stands.

In its place, Senate Democrats will likely turn to non-profit cooperatives, an alternative already favored by the Gang of Six senators on the Finance Committee. Ezra Klein's June interview with Sen. Kent Conrad is a good place to get caught up on the specifics. The New York Times' briefly explains the idea here:

The co-op, modeled after rural electric and agricultural cooperatives in Mr. Conrad’s home state, would offer insurance through a nonprofit, nongovernmental consumer entity run by its members. Mr. Axelrod said one downside of a co-op, from Mr. Obama’s point of view, was that it might be unable to “scale up in such a way that would create a robust” competitor to private insurers.

Will that concession go far enough to win the support of moderate Democrats who remain on the fence? None of Illinois' still undecided lawmakers -- including Reps. Debbie Halvorson, Bill Foster, and Melissa Bean -- have explicitly identified the public option as the major problem with the bills working through Congress. However, if they felt the inclusion of a government-run plan left them vulnerable to overblown conservative attacks about expanding government, co-ops could give them some leeway while preserving some choice on the private market. Of course, the full House would still face a vote on a bill that includes the public option; it would likely be gutted in the Senate version, where moderate votes are really needed, and then negotiations would begin over specifics in conference committee. And the entire package could crumble if progressives in the House revolt, like Rep. Jan Schakowsky and her colleagues vowed to do last month. Stay tuned. Continue reading »

Rep. Mark Kirk has served Illinois' 10th District for a decade now. And over the years he's amassed a comprehensive voting record, attaching his name to hundreds of bills on countless topics. But HJ Res 41 could be the looniest of them all.

In a series documenting that "the more ludicrous bills that are introduced" on Capitol Hill, Congress Matters blogger Casual Wednesday outlines the details of this bill, introduced by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minnesota):

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to prohibit the President from entering into a treaty or other international agreement that would provide for the United States to adopt as legal tender in the United States a currency issued by an entity other than the United States.

Strangely, 37 House members signed on as co-sponsors -- including Kirk and fellow Illinois Republican Judy Biggert -- despite the fact that there is no real effort to create a "global currency."

Not sure how this slipped under our radar back in April. But better late than never.

Here is our latest round-up of health care news:

Biggert Promotes Euthanasia Lie

Last night in Naperville, Reps. Judy Biggert and Mark Kirk entertained questions about health care reform at a town hall forum. No violence or rowdiness was reported -- after all, both are strongly opposed to the Democratic proposals -- but Kirk, who's now a U.S. Senate candidate, continued to suggest that health care reform would harm people with life-threatening illnesses and would cost the government too much money. Biggert, on the other hand, took her criticism one step farther. According to the Daily Herald's editorial board, the Hinsdale Republican joined the Palin brigade, passing around literature claiming that the bills working through Congress would lead to end-of-life euthanasia:

Misinformation will continue to abound. At a forum Wednesday in Naperville, guest speaker U.S. Rep. Judy Biggert, a Hinsdale Republican, distributed a flier stating the Democrats' proposal will require counseling of seniors that might encourage those who are seriously ill to "give up." Later, she admitted to Politics & Projects Editor Joseph Ryan "that was a little inflammatory."

This is a tendentious myth that has been widely debunked. The language in multiple bills actually says that physicians will be paid through Medicare to counsel elderly or terminally ill patients about what medical interventions they would prefer near the end of life. The sessions would take place once every five years and would be completely voluntary. As Jonathan Cohn writes, health care opponents are "swiftboating health reform." Sadly, Biggert knows that this criticism is ridiculous. So why is she distributing such an obvious lie?

Continue reading »

As the national battle over health care reform enters a crucial stage and lawmakers make their case to voters during the August recess, we're going to be regularly tracking the latest health care news across Illinois. Here's our first update:

Schock's Misleading Memo

While Illinois Democrats were busy advocating for comprehensive health care yesterday, Illinois Republicans kept up their effort to stand in the way of such reform. This morning over his Twitter feed, Rep. Aaron Schock sent along a memo, prepared by Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-WI), providing (PDF) "key facts about the House Democrat health care bill for the 18th District of Illinois." But as you'll see, Cantor and Schock use the term facts rather loosely. Here's the first of many distortions in the two-page sheet:

Independent analysis by the Lewin Group shows that 2 out of every 3 people would lose their current coverage, including up to 114 million people who receive health benefits through their employer or other current coverage if a government-run plan “competes” with private companies.

The Lewin Group is hardly "independent." In fact, it's "wholly owned" by UnitedHealth Group, one of the nation's largest insurers. And the Congressional Budget Office released a preliminary analysis (PDF) of the House Democrats' so-called "tri-committee" bill last week and found that a net 3 million people will gain employer-based insurance under the Democratic plan.

But Schock and Cantor aren't done:

Continue reading »

If a simple reform to a federal education program could save the government $86.8 billion over the next 10 fiscal years, one would think it'd be easy to convince an economic conservative like Rep. Judy Biggert to champion the change. Not so.

Last week, the House Education and Labor Committee passed the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, a bill to transform the $92-billion student loan market. As currently constructed, the government subsidizes the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) program to the tune of $55-billion a year. But the loans offered by private insurance companies are virtually identical to those the government dispenses through its the Direct Loan Program. And those companies -- including industry leader Sallie Mae and Wall Street titans like Bank of America, Citigroup, and JPMorgan -- turned what was once an altruistic program into a big business, charging interest rates and hefty late fees for unsecured loans while simultaneously pursuing stressed borrowers who themselves can't discharge the accumulated debt though bankruptcy.

As part of his budget, President Obama called on Congress to phase out these subsidies and instead redirect some of the resources into the government lending program. Any additional capital would be used to fully fund the Pell Grant program as well as create new programs to boost community college budgets, increase college completion rates, and improve early childhood education. When given the chance to vote on the measure last week in committee, Biggert joined 16 other Republicans (PDF) in turning it down. (Rep. Phil Hare voted in favor.)

Continue reading »

Last Thursday, the House passed a $123.1 billion transportation and housing appropriations bill that included an 8 percent boost for the Section 8 housing voucher program and $4 billion for President Obama's high-speed rail initiative. It also included $1.5 million in funding for two projects requested by Rep. Judy Biggert -- a Metra Station in Tinley Park and freight-related traffic relief along Ogden Avenue in Aurora. “These important investments will create local jobs and help keep our area’s road and transit systems working for commuters,” Biggert said in a statement Friday.  “I’m very grateful to my House colleagues for recognizing the rapidly growing transportation needs of communities and centers of commerce in our suburban area.”

The Naperville Sun covered the story as well, quoting Biggert saying that the freight relief "will help to mitigate that impact and keep traffic flowing along one of our most important regional arteries." But the paper forgot one tiny detail -- along with the rest of Illinois' Republican delegation, Biggert voted against the bill.  The Sun staff report also falsely asserted that she "sponsored" the measure (in fact, she did no such thing).

Biggert's effort to have it both ways is unfortunately par for the course with House Republicans this year.  That's the story the Sun should be writing about.