Change comes to Illinois

…but will it succeed?


Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner

Newly elected Illinois ‘Pub Governor, Bruce Rauner, is preparing to engage one of Illinois’ largest political machines. Yes, one even larger that Richard Daley’s Chicago machine at its heyday. He preparing to battle Illinois’ public service unions and the SEIU. Rauner wants to bring Right-to-Work to Illinois.

I can hear the screams and howls already.

Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner Primed for a Showdown with Unions

Jake (Diary)  | 

Up in Wisconsin, Governor Scott Walker has shown it’s possible to take on unions, including government unions, and live to tell the tale, and in large part because of his courage, he is now being considered as a Presidential candidate. It looks like his neighboring governor to the south, Bruce Rauner of Illinois, wants to follow in his footsteps. Rauner is one of the many Republican success stories of the 2014 election, and it looks like he isn’t going to be one to waste his mandate. In a recent appearance in Decatur, Illinois, he announced his intentions to take on the government union bosses. Northern Public Radio quoted him as saying:

“The taxpayers on the outside. It’s a conflict of interest. It’s a closed loop. This is what’s going on. Big problem. And it’s driving up our bureaucracy and jobs are leaving. It’s that closed loop up that; it’s what going on: the unions that contract with the state. I think it’s the number one conflict of interest in our state today.”

As their article also notes, he is blaming prevailing wage and Project Labor agreements for playing a role in driving up costs. He did not stop there. The major goal of his Decatur speech was to push one of his major policy goals: the establishment of “right to work zones” in the state. According to one of the local CBS stations, here is what he said specifically:

“The states that are already growing don’t force unionization into their economy,” Rauner told an audience at Richland Community College in Decatur, a city he said could benefit from such a plan.

“I’m not advocating Illinois becoming a right-to-work state, but I do advocate (for) local governments being allowed to decide whether they’re right-to-work zones,” he said.

As Scott Walker proved up in Wisconsin, it is possible to take on the unions and live, but it is by no means an easy task. I hope Gov. Rauner has the spine his neighbor to the north does. It will be very interesting to follow him over the next few years. He could be the next big star for the Republican Party if he is successful in his endeavors. The articles I linked here make it clear that the unions are not happy with the Illinois governor’s remarks, so we should expect a battle that could be just as intense and drawn out as the one that happened in Wisconsin. We need to make sure Governor Rauner knows he has our support, especially if you live in Illinois.

Rauner is also proposing to lower Illinois’ minimum wage to the federal standard to make Illinois more competitive to its neighboring states. That, too, is an anathema to Illinois unions.

Right-to-Work is returning to Missouri’s legislature this year as well. There have been a number of Right-to-Work bills already filed for the 2015 legislative session, House Bills 47, 48, and 116 as well as Senate Bill 127 and 129. In all, nearly 20 labor related bills have been filed.

The unions had and still have massive clout in Jeff City. One of the leading union shills in the Missouri Legislature, Jeff Roorda, lost his election in November. He was in the news today when he engaged in a scuffle with a St Louis Alderman.

It is time to pass Right-to-Work in Missouri and Illinois.


Many of us would like to see the EPA abolished. If that agency ever had a real, useful purpose, that purpose could just as easily be performed by the states. In fact every state has an EPA equivalent so the transition or responsibilities would be minimal.

Another federal agency whose time may have come to fade away, or at least be constrained, is the FCC. The FCC, or the Federal Communications Commission, is a child of the 1930s, a product of FDR’s New Deal. Its creation was a merging of the older FRC, or Federal Radio Commission, that regulated radio stations and wireless communications with telephonic communication of wired telephone and telegraphic operations by the ICC, the Interstate Commerce Commission.

In the early days of wired and wireless communication, some oversight was needed. Before federal intervention, multiple radio stations used the same transmitting frequency, or frequencies so close to one another that they created mutual interference. The result was a race to acquire the most powerful transmitter. The stronger signal received the most listeners. The FRC was created to insure no two stations used the same frequency within a given geographic area and to insure stations on adjacent frequencies had sufficient separation to prevent mutual interference. The FRC issued regulations that governed transmitter power. signal bandwidth and standards for signal purity.

Early wired telephonic and telegraphic communications was a patchwork of carriers across the country. There was little to no interoperability and many companies openly competed, sometime violently, for the same territory. As wired technology increased, standards were required to insure seamless communication across the country and with our neighbors, north and south, who used different national standards. British standards in the case of Canada.

Unfortunately, the FCC, especially under recent liberal administrations and commissioners, has wandered far astray from its original purpose. No longer is the Commission primarily concerned with technology and interoperability, but has shifted focus to content, and that is where the conflict between the FCC and Congress rests.

FCC Under Scrutiny as GOP Senators Try to Head Off More Internet Regs

Republican measure would limit the commission’s regulatory authority while many Dems want to treat Net like public utility.

by Rob Longley, January 28, 2015 – 10:45 pm

A Senate hearing last Wednesday took aim at a controversy that has vexed Congress, federal regulators and the telecommunications industry for the better part of a decade: How best to regulate the Internet — and how large a role the Federal Communications Commission should play.

The hearing of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee focused on a Republican proposal to maintain so-called “net neutrality” — the idea that all Internet content should be open to the public and treated equally.

The GOP bill, crafted by the committee’s chairman, Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), and his counterpart on the House panel, Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), is an effort to head off the FCC’s own plan to preserve net neutrality. Most analysts expect the FCC to push for greater regulatory control over the web and the Internet service providers that deliver it to consumers. The FCC has sought greater control in the past, but the federal courts have struck down its efforts, saying the commission lacked congressional authority to take such action. The commission is set to announce its latest plan next month.

The Republican measure would allow the FCC to impose tough new limits on ISPs, especially with respect to how they manage their networks. But it also would limit the commission’s regulatory authority, and would fall well short of the solution touted by many Democrats and consumer groups: Turn the Internet into a veritable public utility like water and electricity, a move that would give the FCC broad powers to control service providers and, in effect, oversee their operation.

Such a scenario does not sit well with Thune.

“There is a well-founded fear that regulating the Internet like a public utility monopoly will harm its entrepreneurial nature [and] chill investment,” the senator said in his opening statement Wednesday.

Meredith Atwell Baker, president and CEO of industry trade group CTIA — The Wireless Association, agreed. She was one of five witnesses to testify at Wednesday’s hearing. Baker said the FCC’s expected plan, which would include a decades-old set of regulations known as Title II, would force “1930s-era wired rules” onto wireless broadband services. That, in turn, she said, would stunt growth and innovation, and in the end, lead to higher costs and diminished services for the public.

“It would harm consumers and our economy,” Baker said.

But Democrats fear that weakening the FCC’s bite would lead to a less-than-open Internet, a development that could also harm consumers, said Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), the committee’s ranking Democrat. Consumer groups fear that service providers would use “loopholes” in the GOP plan to set up a two-tiered Internet by charging companies a kind of information-superhighway toll to boost their websites’ visibility and access, an option known as paid prioritization. By necessity, that means companies who refuse to pay the toll have less visibility — a situation that goes against the principles of an open Internet.

“[The public] does not want their access to websites and services blocked,” Nelson said Wednesday. “They’re worried about their broadband provider picking winners and losers on the Internet by relegating those content companies who refuse to pay a toll to a slow lane of service.”

You can read the entire article at the PJ Media website.

Some of the same groups fear an impotent FCC as well. No one disagrees that the FCC was done a great job and provided a needed service—in the past. However, its current focus on content is negating that accumulated good will from the public. The FCC needs to be reined in and returned to its focus of maintaining the nation’s lead in communications and cease its efforts to enforce a liberal political agenda. For be broken up into a less oppressive organization.

It is a new day

…or is it?

Yesterday’s Virginia primary had a big upset. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA-7) lost his seat in the primary to challenger and economist Dave Brat. There are numerous articles being published this morning how that happened.

Some pundits say is was a Tea Party victory. In reality, it wasn’t, it was a grassroots victory assisted by some big-name conservatives like Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin. There is a difference.

The national Tea Party organizations like the Tea Party Express and AFP ignored the race assuming, so say some, that Cantor was a shoo-in. Apparently, so did many of Cantor’s supporters because they stayed home and didn’t vote. The turnout was very low, 65,000 out of a population of over a quarter-million.

Cantor’s flip-flops came home. He hadn’t had much opposition since he first won his seat in 2001. He was unopposed until 2010 and 2012. In 2012, he courted the Tea Party and won by 79%. Since then, Cantor turned, vilifying his former supporters and sucking up to the GOP establishment.

David Brat, the winner of the primary against Cantor wrote this statement in an article for the Daily Caller earlier this year.

Congressman Cantor’s profile has been erratic even by Washington standards — flitting from eager establishmentarian coat-holder to self-glorified “Young Gun” and back again. His loyalties, both upward and downward, have shifted in his eager embrace of the Ruling Class. Washington’s only genuine article of faith: maintaining control regardless of how that control affects the life of the folks back home.

Like so many other GOP Representatives, Cantor let ambition override his duty to his constituents. Being elected in a strong, conservative district is no guarantee for incumbents. (Are you listening Vicky Hartzler?) So far this year, we are seeing numerous successful challenges to the GOP establishment, Cantor is one of them.


The worm turned…in California of all places!

Tenure for teachers in California received a severe blow in court this week. Judge Rolf M. Treu, Los Angeles Superior Court, found five California statues concerning teacher tenure unconstitutional.

Treu found that the statutes permit too many grossly incompetent teachers to remain in classrooms across the state — and found that those teachers shortchange their students by putting them months or years behind their peers in math and reading.

He ruled that such a system violates the state constitution’s guarantee that all children receive “basic equality of educational opportunity.” In a blunt, unsparing 16-page opinion, Treu compared his ruling to the seminal federal desegregation case Brown v. Board of Education, decided 60 years ago last month. “The evidence is compelling. Indeed, it shocks the conscience,” Treu wrote. — Politico.

For decades the California educational system has been the prime example was what not to do. With test scores pummeling, teachers fought to block testing, lest it prove the abysmal results of their social engineering agenda.

Test scores should be used to review the effectiveness of education. Too many school districts—and state educational systems, would rather teach the tests than actually educate their students. Systems that do ‘teach the tests’ then blame the tests for their failures to educate. Long before this case, it was evident that local and state education systems were more interested in their own sinecure than teaching.

We will soon hear the howl of outraged teacher unions calling for this judge’s head for speaking truth. Once again, unions have been found to be the refuge of many incompetents. The good teachers will get tarred equally along with the bad. They have no other recourse…California is not a RIght-to-Work state. Teachers are required to join the teachers union if they want to teach.

But that was yesterday. Perhaps…just perhaps the students of California will have a new day now that it will be easier to be rid of the lazy and incompetents in the California school system.

Bullet Points

Today’s topic is a collection of small items that have appeared in the news. Yesterday, everyone was talking about the shootings in Overland Park, KS outside the Jewish Community Center and a Jewish Retirement Home. A lot of information was discussed by the networks and local media outlets. As the day grew on, it was revealed that NONE of the victims were Jewish.

The grandfather and grandson were there for an audition for a local talent show. The Center was being used for the auditions. The show was a regional affair unrelated to the Center. The woman was at the retirement home to visit a relative. She was a Christian. In fact, late yesterday, it was announced that all three were Christians and committed church-goers. Whatever motive the shooter had, he didn’t attack anyone connected with the Jewish Community in the Kansas City area, just innocent people at the wrong place at the wrong time.


This section could be titled, “What goes around, comes around.” It appears a RINO may reap what she’s sown.

‘RIGHT-TO-WORK’ FIGHT — Following last week’s vote against “right-to-work” and her vocal positioning with Democrats and Labor against the issue, some in the House Republican Caucus have began a quiet campaign to pull Rep. Anne Zerr, R-St. Charles, from her chairmanship of the House Economic Development Committee. Several caucus members have taken that concern to House Speaker Tim Jones, but it is unlikely the speaker’s office will ultimately pull the trigger. On several other priorities (tax credits, for example) Zerr has been a loyal supporter. And it isn’t like Zerr has been necessarily standing in the way: Instead of the “right-to-work” bill going through Zerr’s committee, it went through Rep. Bill Lant’s special committee on the workforce. — PoliticMO Newsletter, April 15, 2014.

There are a few others in the Legislature who should have their leadership and Committee assignments removed. The time for fence-sitting is over. You are either a conservative or you aren’t. Legislators no longer have the option to pick and choose.


If there was any doubt that Harry Reid was behind the Bundy/BLM confrontation, his remarks on it certainly implies that he was. He spoke with reporters yesterday saying, “It’s not over.”

Tough-talking Harry Reid vows Bundy ranch showdown ‘not over’ for feds

Feds seek administrative solution; protesters stay

By Valerie Richardson The Washington Times, Monday, April 14, 2014

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid weighed in on the Nevada ranch standoff, warning that even though federal agents retreated over the weekend, “it’s not over.”

Mr. Reid’s remarks Monday appeared to be his first public comments since Bureau of Land Management agents touched off a confrontation with demonstrators last week by seizing cattle from the Bundy family ranch in a dispute over grazing fees. The agency, which says Cliven Bundy owes more than $1 million in unpaid fees, backed off Saturday and returned the cattle.

In impromptu remarks Monday after a speech at the University of Nevada, Reno, however, Mr. Reid struck a defiant tone on the matter of lawbreaking.

“We can’t have an American people that violate the law and just walk away from it,” Mr. Reid told Reno TV station KRNV. “So it’s not over.”

That feeling was shared, albeit from the opposite direction, by some of the hundreds of protesters from across the West who congregated at the Bundy cattle ranch near Mesquite, Nev.

Tyler Lewis, from St. George, Utah, stands in the middle of northbound Interstate 15 with his gun near Bunkerville, Nev., while gathering with other supporters of the Bundy family to challenge the Bureau of Land Management on Saturday. (Associated Press)

Enlarge Photo

Tyler Lewis, from St. George, Utah, stands in the middle of northbound … more >

Many of them remained Monday at the property, despite pleas from federal and state officials to disband and return home.

“I feel sorry for any federal agents that want to come in here and try to push us around or anything like that,” Jarad Miller said in an interview with KRNV-TV. “I really don’t want violence toward them, but if they’re going to come bring violence to us, if that’s the language they want to speak, we’ll learn it.”

Bureau of Land Management agents returned about 400 cattle to the Bundy family over the weekend amid escalating tensions between law enforcement and hundreds of anti-BLM demonstrators outside the ranch.

Mr. Bundy’s son Ammon was struck with a stun gun, and local television footage showed Bundy relatives and supporters engaged in heated arguments with law enforcement officers.

BLM spokesman Craig Leff confirmed Monday that “the gather is over” after telling reporters over the weekend that the bureau will “continue to work to resolve the matter administratively and judicially.”

Speculation on Mr. Reid’s role in last week’s confrontation at the ranch has been rife, given his prominent position as Nevada’s elder statesman and his ties to BLM director Neil Kornze.

Mr. Kornze, 35, served for eight years on the Senate leader’s staff before joining the BLM in 2011. He was the Mr. Reid’s pick to head the agency, and his final confirmation was April 8 as the roundup at the Bundy ranch was underway.

In an updated statement Saturday, Mr. Kornze said the cattle gather was halted “because of our grave concern about the safety of employees and members of the public.”

Mr. Reid also has been accused of attempting to shut down the ranch in order to move ahead with two nearby solar energy projects, an accusation denied Monday by the senator’s press aide.

The column continues at the website.

Every time you turn around, either Harry Reid or his son, Rory, is involved in this story. Rory, runs Harry Reid’s real-estate empire in Nevada and is attempting to sell a solar project with hardware produced by the Chinese. To top if off, Neil Kornze, the newly installed BLM manager, is a former Harry Reid staffer!

Wheels within wheels. After watching Harry Reid’s machinations for the last decade, it is apparent he won’t let this little speed bump halt his Billion Dollar plan. There will be another attempt on the Bundys, another armed raid by the feds on a citizen. The real question is, “Will the militias return if the Feds attack again?”

Busy Week

And a busy week it will be! I’ll not be posting today, nor Thursday. Thursday is the annual 2nd Amendment Rally in Jeff City. I’ll be leaving early (groan!) with a couple of friends and will be spending the day in Missouri’s Capitol.

My excuse for not posting today is…well. I don’t have one. Nothing in the morning news stream is appealing. I did get word late last night that the Pay Check Protection bill passed Missouri’s House. Dems and RINO union goons say it will kill unions in Missouri. More lies. The bill just won’t allow unions to extort dues from non-members. That’s an outrage for them. Imagine, not being able to steal from non-members!

House Passes Paycheck Protection 83-70

Here’s a blown up photo, courtesy of Eli Yokley:


Republicans who voted against passage:

  • Rep. Jay Barnes
  • Rep. T.J. Berry
  • Rep. Doug Funderburk
  • Rep. Elaine Gannon
  • Rep. Ron Hicks
  • Rep. Galen Hidgon
  • Rep. Jeanie Lauer
  • Rep. Nick Marshall
  • Rep. John McCaherty
  • Rep. Chris Molendorp
  • Rep. Jim Neely
  • Rep. Myron Neth
  • Rep. Donna Pfautsch
  • Rep. Caleb Rowden
  • Rep. Ron Schieber
  • Rep. Shelia Solon
  • Rep. Chrissy Sommer
  • Rep. Noel Torpey
  • Rep. Paul Weiland
  • Rep. Ann Zerr

Just FYI, the names above are the Rogue’s Gallery of RINOs and union goons who voted against the bill. Let’s do our best to remember them come the primary and November elections.

Thursday’s Thoughts for October 24, 2013

I was in the shower this morning and an item on the radio news made me think of our Pledge of Allegiance.

“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

I was thinking the Pledge arose in the aftermath of the Civil War when Southerners were required to swear loyalty oaths to regain citizenship. Many Southerners, did not.

After a bit of research, I was surprised to learn that our current Pledge arose in the late 19th Century. It was originally drafted by Francis Bellamy (1855-1931), a progressive—what we would call today a socialist.

You can follow the links to read about Bellamy and his socialists views. I do not subscribe to his politics, nor, if they knew of them, would many today—except for democrats.

There have been three versions of the Pledge, the original one, another from 1923 and our current version that was adopted in 1954. I can remember the controversy when the words, “under God,” was added. The atheists complained, as expected, that it violated the Constitution. When asked to provide chapter and verse, they could not. But there is one word that is common in all of the versions, the word, “indivisible.”

I attended a meeting earlier this week. The meeting opened, as are many such meetings, with a Prayer and the Pledge. As I recited the Pledge, we said, “…one nation, indivisible, with…” It struck me that we are no longer ‘indivisible’ and have not been for more than 50 years. We are a nation of factions, no longer united.

In my opinion, the trend started with FDR’s New Deal. (Most current histories of the New Deal fail to mention that large portions of it were later declared unconstitutional and the measures, instead of ending the depression, extended it for more than eight years.) The divisions accelerated with Johnson’s Great Society. Now, with Obama in office, divisive policies have been used to widen the divisions in the country to maintain political power of the administration and to lessen that of their opponents.

Is the Pledge of Allegiance still valid? I would like to believe it is, but there is that niggling thought that it is no longer valid and has not been for some time.

Look around us at the divisions that exists just within the Republican Party. The Karl Roves of the establishment plot against conservatives and the non-establishment ‘Pubs, the so-called ‘moderates’ like John McCain and Lindsey Graham vote against their fellow party members and actively support the party’s political opponents. Then, add the divisions created by partisan politics, the creation and expansion of the Welfare State that takes from those who produce and gives to those who will not. No, I believe the Pledge is no longer appropriate, no matter how much we wish it was.


FUBAR. That is being used to describe Obamacare. The polite version of FUBAR is Fouled Up Beyond all Repair or Recognition. Of course, there are many other translations of that acronym and all are correct. I came across this article that applies the term in another venue.

The Military Has A Term (or Acronym) To Describe The ObamaCare Rollout: FUBAR

October 23rd, 2013 at 10:00 PM

With the White House now hinting agreement with the Republicans who called for a delay in penalizing individuals under the ObamaCare mandate, the disastrous rollout of Barack Obama’s singular signature piece of legislation passed during his presidency can be summed up in one military term (or acronym): FUBAR*.

Notwithstanding the fact that the mainstream media has been near-unanimously stuck on declaring that’s problems were caused by a mere “glitch,” everything about ObamaCare’s rollout, thus far, has proved to be a disaster of epic proportions. It has lived down to the most dire warnings of becoming a “third-world experience.”

When critics claimed that ObamaCare would cause people to lose their employer-sponsored coverage and that prices would skyrocket, they were heckled and jeered. It turns out, though, they were right.

Despite Obama’s promises to the contrary, millions of Americans are, in fact, losing their health insurance and, based on this chart, most others are seeing their healthcare costs soar.IB-premium-exchange-by-state-table-1-600Source Report: How Will You Fare in the Obamacare Exchanges?

In addition to the Administration also trying to hide how many people have actually signed up on the, CBS News has uncovered a serious pricing problem on the Obamacare site.

…A new online feature can dramatically underestimate the cost of insurance.

The administration announced it would provide a new “shop and browse” feature Sunday, but it’s not giving consumers the real picture. In some cases, people could end up paying double of what they see on the website, CBS News’ Jan Crawford reported Wednesday on “CBS This Morning.” [Emphasis added.]

To make matters worse, in addition to the Obama Administration enlisting ACORN, SEIU and other union allies to become ObamaCare “navigators” at up to $48 per hour, it turns out that many of them haven’t even been certified on how to navigate a Prius let alone ObamaCare.

This is only further complicated by the fact that “cyber squatters” are hijacking private, personal information, according to the Washington Times:

More than 700 websites have been created with names playing off of Obamacare or, making it likely that some Americans will mistakenly hand over private information to unknown third-parties.

With all that has happened in the first days of the ObamaCare rollout, it appears that the military term SNAFU will become the norm under ObamaCare.

However, it wasn’t like we didn’t know it was coming, right?

No wonder Jon Stewart is upset.


My post for today is getting a bit long. Here’s a link to a story about the UAW’s drive to unionize a VW plant in Tennessee is being halted by employees who do not want to be unionized!  Tennessee is a Right-to-Work state.

‘Transplant’ laborers may put brakes on UAW drive in right-to-work states

By Tim Devaney, The Washington Times, Wednesday, October 23, 2013

A United Auto Workers drive to organize workers at the Volkswagen Passat plant in Tennessee is turning into a critical battle in labor’s drive to breach the wall of foreign automakers who have flocked to the American South and other right-to-work states in recent years to open nonunion plants.

But in a twist of typical labor-management game plan, the UAW fight is not with the German-owned Volkswagen, where some executives have indicated they are more willing to work with the union, but with the plant’s workers, Tennessee state officials and anti-labor advocacy groups who fear the precedent a successful organizing drive could set.

Follow the link and read the complete article. It shows why Unions fear Right-to-Work.