Thursday, November 1, 2007

SB 572: Let The Bidding For Votes Begin?

It's time to check back in with SB 572.

Representative Sidney Mathias filed House Amendment No. 7 to SB 572 on October 11, 2007. The amendment will obligate the RTA to make an annual grant of $250,000 to the Intertownship Transportation Program for Northwest Suburban Cook County. The ITPNSCC was created in 2004 as part of the the Illinois Transit Ridership and Economic Development (TRED) Pilot Project Program. ITPNSCC provides medical care related trips for senior citizens and disabled persons.

Representative Mathias is a Republican. He signed on as a co-sponsor of SB 572 at the end of May. In contrast, most of his suburban Republican Party colleagues opposed SB 572 when it came to a vote in September.

Does Mathias' Amendment No. 7 provide a model of what will be necessary to get suburban politicians on the SB 572 bandwagon? Will we see a string of $250,000 van pool service grants written into the RTA Act to encourage other suburban politicians to support SB 572?


Anonymous said...

This, and the McHenry one shows that the horse trading has begun. SB572 was already a mess with the 9 and 12 vote prerequisites, giving Stroger appointments subject to confirmation by the suburban county commissioners, etc. Since the premise of Frank Kruesi's cry for funding in late 2004 was that the suburbs owed the CTA something, and clearly McHenry County doesn't believe that it does, that is a fair compromise.

The only rational thing is to give a temporary bailout, coupled with some fare increases and cuts of obviously unproductive or duplicate routes, and then start with a real reform agenda and a sustainable funding source next year. SB572 offers neither.

Anonymous said...

Its nothing but RINOs and DINOs holding 572 back!

Anonymous said...

This also probably will encourage an amendatory veto. The Gov. probably would do one to change the sales tax provision, and he could add that earmarks in the bill, if amended in the manner Mathias suggests, are pork. The coalition then falls apart when the bill goes back to the House, as it did with the budget.

Anonymous said...

This has been on my mind for some time..... it sure raises a few questions..