Editorial

Quinn Legacy - Bankrupting Illinois?

David A. Lombardo

Oak Park's Fenwick High School, one of the most academically distinguished in the country, anywhere, understandably touts such alumni as a NASAastronaut, Rhodes scholars, Pulitzer Prize winners, an Olympic gold medalist, a Heisman Trophy winner, professional athletes and the CEOs of many national and international corporations. So it will be interesting to see how Fenwick memorializes another of its graduates: Illinois Governor Pat Quinn. Perhaps a very small cabinet, in a corner facing a wall, that contains Fenwick's losers, which most likely only includes the Governor.

Quinn would have better odds at leaving a positive legacy if he gave up government and looked for a cure for cancer. I'm not a historian of Illinois governors, primarily because I've never cared for farce literature, but at least in my recollection I can recall some who were bigger crooks but none who did more to bankrupt the state of Illinois than Quinn.

It's one thing to line your pockets with pilfered money, the sale of some political office or getting rich making insider deals. Such is the common fare of so many past Illinois governors, but for the most part the only thing that was lost was money. But Quinn is something else; he has taken being a bad governor to the level of an art form. He has single-handedly crafted a policy that will see Illinois literally surpassing Detroit as the most dysfunctional, anti-business government in the United States.

Now I know what some of you are thinking: I have some sort of ax to grind. Illinois isn't that bad. After all we have... ummm... soaring crime... the murder capital of the United States...ah, winter....Okay, the point is, I'm not alone in my opinion.

A 33-question survey conducted by a consumer-services firm measured attributes that determined small business friendliness. The more than 12,000 small business owners and operators who responded gave a rating of A+ to Texas, Utah and Virginia. Three states were given an F rating: California, Illinois and Rhode Island. But how does that actually translate into practice for Illinois? Well, ask Walgreens.

Walgreens, a 113-year-old Deerfield, Illinois-based drugstore chain is planning to move to Switzerland. I can tell you with reasonable assurance, it ain't for the fondue, chocolate or scenery. Bituminous Insurance, for example, is moving a whopping five miles from Rock Island across the river to Davenport, Iowa. Trust me when I say Davenport doesn't even have fondue, chocolate or scenery.

No, it's something about making a profit and how one of the worst tax structures in the United States is hampering that selfish goal. For those of you who can't sympathize with Walgreens' plight and who turn your noses up at such a mundane and self-indulgent orientation, you might want to check your 401K to see if Walgreens is hidden in there somewhere. And while you're at it, look to see if any other Illinois-based companies are there.

You know how your nest egg has been underperforming these past few years? Uh huh, brings a whole new focus to Quinn's stewardship of Illinois, doesn't it? In a country that has the world's highest corporate tax rates, Quinn has distinguished Illinois as one of the country's highest state corporate tax rates. And you wonder why corporations are moving off-shore?

I had the opportunity to meet gubernatorial challenger Bruce Rauner this past week. It was one of those meet-and-greet things where you get a handshake, he tells you that you're the most important voter in Illinois, takes a picture with you, does a lot of smiling then leaves as quickly as he arrived to do another meet-and-greet somewhere else.

My attempt to get him on our radio show or to even talk about gun control pretty much fell on deaf ears. He says he's pro-Second Amendment, but I didn't see it in his eyes when I stuck my toe in the waters.

Rauner left with me knowing precious little more than before I met him, but there was this: Rauner's sales pitch is 180 degrees different from Quinn's. I don't know the measure of the man, but I do know he got wealthy as a businessman, so he must have some idea what the hell he's doing. And he wants to apply good business practices to state government to end the hemorrhaging of business out of Illinois. As Texas has proven, what's good for business is good for Texas in terms of productivity, employment and taxes.

I don't know where Rauner really stands on the Second Amendment despite his lip service to it. Over the next few months, we'll continue to try to get him to come into our studio and talk about his gun control thoughts as well as fiscal policy. I have my doubts he'll actually go on a pro-Second Amendment radio show, but I do know this. When it comes to Illinois' fiscal health, he has real world, very successful experience, and he certainly talks the talk. I picked up a Rauner for Governor yard sign; I recommend you do the same.  

Beretta manufacturing bails out of Maryland

SAFER USA &

AURORA SPORTSMEN'S CLUB

COURSE SCHEDULE

(Private group classes available)  

Unless noted, all classes meet at the SAFER USA facility

190 W. Lincoln St; Waterman, IL 60556. Call 815-744-5487 for further information.

NRA RANGE SAFETY OFFICER

Sunday, September 21st, 9:00 am - 6:00 pm

NRA BASIC INSTRUCTOR TRAINING (6 hours)

Saturday, September 13th, 9:00 am - 3:00 pm

NRA INSTRUCTOR PISTOL (10 hours)

Sunday, September 14th, 8:00 am - 6:00 pm

ILLINOIS CONCEALED CARRY I (16 hours)

Sat, Aug 23rd and Sun, Aug 24th 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 

Sat, Sep 6th and Sun, Sep 7th 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 

 ILLINOIS CONCEALED CARRY I (16 Hours)

FUND RAISER FOR FOX VALLEY FRIENDS OF THE NRA

$100 to FVFNRA for every registered student - Plus

all students will be entered into a drawing for an NRA Special Edition Ruger LC9 - 9mm pistol (1 in 30 odds of winning during class)

Sat, August 9th and Sun, August 10th 9:00 am - 5:00 pm  

 ILLINOIS CONCEALED CARRY II (8 Hours)

Sun, August 17th 9:00 am - 5:00 pm  

Sat, September 13th 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 

NRA Basic Pistol (8 Hours) 

Sat, August 16th 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 

Register for a SAFER USA class 

Discrete, private instruction available for VIP & High Profile Individuals  

Call 877-954-3030 

Maryland assault weapon ban

challenged in federal court

Lawyers for the state of Maryland and gun rights advocates debated in federal court about the government's power to hem in the Second Amendment to ward off mass shootings. Matthew Fader, a lawyer from the attorney general's office, told U.S District Judge Catherine C. Blake that the ban was needed even though such mass gun violence had yet to be visited on Maryland. "We are as much at risk as any state in the country," he said. But John Parker Sweeney, a lawyer for gun sellers, owners and advocates who have sued the state, said, "The government does not have any right under the Second Amendment to tell the citizens they cannot choose popular firearms." The Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that the Second Amendment protects private individuals' ownership of guns. But its ruling left much unsaid-including what types of guns are covered and where the right applies-spurring further lawsuits. Those battles have gained new momentum after the Newtown killings, which drove a number of states to tighten their gun laws. "There can be no doubt that the challenged laws prohibit conduct protected by the Second Amendment as it was historically understood," the advocates' lawyers wrote. "Plaintiffs are prohibited from acquiring firearms commonly possessed for lawful purposes, which is precisely what the Supreme Court found to be protected." 

Gun control is not a public health issue

A federal appeals court last week upheld a Florida law that seeks to bar doctors from discussing firearms safety with their patients, including inquiring whether they keep any guns at home. The action reversed a 2012 injunction issued by a federal judge in Miami, who ruled that the Florida law violated the free-speech rights of physicians to counsel their patients about health-related matters. The appeals court panel voted 2 to 1 to uphold the Florida law. Despite doctors' good intentions, several would-be patients and the parents of children seeking medical services perceived the questions about gun ownership as intrusive and offensive. In one case medical staff members separated a mother from her children and then asked the children whether their mother owned any firearms. In another instance, a mother refused to answer questions about whether she kept a gun at home, telling the physician that she felt the question was an invasion of her privacy. The pediatrician then informed the mother that she had 30 days to find a new doctor for her child. The Florida law sought to protect patients' privacy by restricting non-relevant inquiries and record keeping by physicians about firearms. Violators could lose their licenses and face up to $10,000 in fines. In reversing the lower court injunction, the appeals court agreed with the state. "We find that the Act is a valid regulation of professional conduct that has only incidental effect on physicians' speech," Judge Gerald Tjoflat wrote for the court. "As such, the Act does not facially violate the First Amendment." The judge added, "The Act simply codifies that good medical care does not require inquiry or record-keeping regarding firearms when unnecessary to a patient's care."