WBEZ | john cullerton

Illinois leaders hold another pension meeting, still no clear deal

Fri, 14 Jun 2013 16:30:00 -0500

Illinois’ top public officials met behind closed doors Friday to discuss the state’s $100 billion pension debt. And still, there is no clear compromise on pension reform.

The meeting, and pensions stalemate, comes as Gov. Pat Quinn called lawmakers back to Springfield for a special session next week to address pension reform.

Without a compromise from legislative leaders, lawmakers have been left wondering why the special session is necessary.

Quinn said Friday he wants state senators to re-vote on a bill they soundly rejected two weeks ago, but was approved in the House.

“I’m going to make a Herculean effort to get ‘yes’ votes on that bill,” Quinn told reporters.

But Senate President John Cullerton says getting 20 senators to flip their votes will be tough.

“So, uh, I’m not very optimistic,” Cullerton said.

Meantime, Republican Senate leader Christine Radogno says she was uncomfortable at Friday’s meeting watching Democratic leaders disagree.

Democrats hold supermajorities in the House and Senate in Springfield and the leaders in those two chambers have yet to see eye-to-eye on the best way to reduce retirement benefits of state employees.

“I kind of felt like I was witness an awkward family fight,” Radogno said. “It’s clear that there’s not agreement, even close to agreement between the Democrats.”

Quinn also requested that lawmakers form a rare, special panel of lawmakers, called a conference committee, to come up with an agreed-upon pension plan. But that, too, was rejected by House Speaker Michael Madigan.

“I’m concerned on the conference committee that it’s an effort by the governor to distance himself from the process,” Madigan said.

But Quinn defended that plan, saying conference committees are designed to break a legislative stalemate when no other solutions are present.

Tony Arnold covers Illinois politics for WBEZ. Follow him @tonyjarnold.

Top House Republican thinks Democrats purposely haven’t passed pensions

Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:30:00 -0500

The top Republican in the Illinois House of Representatives says he thinks Democratic leaders are purposely not passing pension reform for their own political gain.

There are lots of conspiracies for why pension reform hasn’t been approved, from the basic stance that it’s purely a legal debate over how to interpret the constitution, to another, more complex thought: that the powerful House Speaker and state Democratic Party Chairman Michael Madigan is stalling because it would somehow help his daughter, Attorney General Lisa Madigan, become governor in next year’s election.

Lisa Madigan has only said she’s considering a run for governor. Today - House Republican leader Tom Cross was asked if he subscribes to that second theory.

“Yes,” Cross said.

Cross repeated his answer of “yes” seven times to a series of reporters’ questions that ranged from why Michael Madigan and his fellow Democrat, Senate President John Cullerton, would benefit from it, to how it would help Lisa Madigan’s potential campaign.

Cross eventually expanded on his thoughts, saying Democrats in Illinois are powerful and if the leaders in the Senate and House really wanted pension reform passed, they would’ve done it already.

“The two most powerful guys in the State of Illinois can get anything done,” Cross said. “They pass a tax increase in the middle of the night, highest tax increase in the history of the state. Two guys that passed a pension holiday in the mid-2000s without blinking an eye can’t get this done? Seriously? I mean, seriously?”

For his part, House Speaker Michael Madigan said earlier this week that if he didn’t want pension reform done, he wouldn’t have worked to pass a bill that ultimately failed in the state Senate.

At that same media availability, Cullerton credited Madigan’s passage of the bill in the House with helping get labor groups to the negotiating table and endorse a rival pension bill.

Cross’s comments on Wednesday came on the same day Speaker Madigan filed an amendment on a pension reform bill passed by the State Senate. Madigan’s amendment includes the language that the House had approved earlier in the legislative session, but rivals the Senate plan. A hearing on the amendment is scheduled for next week.

Tony Arnold covers statehouse politics for WBEZ. Follow him @tonyjarnold

Quinn offers new pension proposal, but fate in legislature uncertain

Mon, 10 Jun 2013 15:22:00 -0500

Ill. Gov. Pat Quinn is asking lawmakers to approve a plan that has previously stalled in the state senate. He has called legislators back to Springfield next week for a special, one-day session to address pension reform after they adjourned for the summer without sending a bill to the governor’s desk for approval.

Quinn met privately for two hours on Monday with Senate President John Cullerton and House Speaker Michael Madigan, both Chicago Democrats. Quinn’s plan is one Cullerton had supported, in which two rival pension reform plans are attached to the same bill. That way, if one plan is found unconstitutional by the courts, then the second plan would be put into effect.

“We put one idea after another before both houses of the legislature,” Quinn said. “There’s a way to accomplish it if the two leaders work together as they have over and over again over the last several years.”

Cullerton said he’s willing to try Quinn’s idea. Cullerton had pitched the plan of putting both pension reform bills on one single piece of legislation months ago, but the plan stalled earlier this year. On Monday, Cullerton blamed The Civic Committee headed by former Illinois Attorney General Ty Fahner, for taking votes away from the plan.

“They’re the ones that killed the original Senate Bill 1, so they’ve gotta make a decision whether or not they want to support this new proposal that the governor’s asked me to try to pass,” Cullerton said.

But Speaker Madigan wouldn’t commit to calling the bill for a vote, telling reporters repeatedly that the governor can make the differences between the two pension proposals simple or complex. Madigan said he wants the governor to meet with individual state senators to pass the bill approved by the House, something labor unions oppose. He said that is the simple choice.

“When we passed the House pension bill, we didn’t have 60 votes to pass the bill until I had personal conversations with about 20 House members, persuaded them vote for the bill,” Madigan said. “That’s what we need the governor to do.”

The bill Madigan passed in the House of Representatives calls for a variety of cuts to retirement benefits for state employees, including raising the retirement age and reducing cost of living increases. Cullerton’s plan offers some state employees a choice between health care in retirement or cost of living increases. Many labor organizations favor Cullerton’s bill and have said Madigan’s plan is unconstitutional.

After Monday’s private meeting, Quinn suggested to reporters that Cullerton and Madigan may not be motivated to pass a pension reform bill.

“John Cullerton and Mike Madigan have known each other for 34 years. They’re close friends. They’re family friends,” Quinn told reporters Monday. “And when they want to put a bill on my desk that’s one of their priorities, they know how to do it.”

Tony Arnold covers Illinois politics for WBEZ. Follow him @tonyjarnold.

Quinn prepared to call special session on pensions

Tue, 04 Jun 2013 14:01:00 -0500

Illinois Governor Pat Quinn said he’s ready to call a special session. That’s after lawmakers failed to pass a pension plan last week. But first, the governor says he wants leaders to work out an agreement first.

Quinn and Senate President John Cullerton met Tuesday morning to discuss the state’s pension system. Missing from the meeting, was House Speaker Michael Madigan. Quinn said Madigan was unavailable and unreachable because he doesn’t carry a cell phone.

The governor said he wasn’t frustrated by the speaker’s absence, but focused on solving the pension problem.

Last week, Madigan had made remarks that a lack of leadership in the Senate is one reason why there is no solution to the state’s nearly $100 billion pension liability. Before adjourning, Cullerton looked straight at Madigan when expressing his disappointment at the lack of movement on pensions.

The governor says for things to move, Madigan and Cullerton need to get past personal differences.

“On Friday, John Cullerton and Michael Madigan in the House of Representatives working together for a pension holiday for the city of Chicago. So if they can work for a pension holiday, they can work for pension reform for the people of Illinois,” he said.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel made a legislative bid to secure a 2 year break from making pension payment to the Chicago Public Schools retirement fund.

Quinn said he wouldn’t sign off on that bill if a statewide pension plan wasn’t in place first.

On Monday, Fitch Ratings downgraded the state’s bond rating. Illinois has the lowest general obligation bond rating of any state.

Quinn says that will continue if a pension plan isn’t approved.

Susie An covers business for WBEZ. Follow her at @soosiean

Illinois Senate rejects one of two pension reform bills

Fri, 31 May 2013 08:15:00 -0500

As Illinois lawmakers prepare Friday for their final day of the Spring session, the issue most say should be top priority received a blow Thursday evening.

The full state Senate overwhelmingly rejected a pension reform plan supported by the House of Representatives but panned by several labor unions. Just 17 senators, mostly Republicans, voted in favor of the bill.

“How do you breach a contract?” Democratic State Sen. Kwame Raoul asked during a floor debate Thursday evening. “Well, you renege on a promise.”

The majority of senators voting against the bill said it doesn't meet the standards of Illinois' constitution. Unions representing state workers had vowed a lawsuit if the bill passed. But those who spoke in favor of the plan stressed the importance of passing a pension reform bill.

“Retirees are worried and they should be that if we don’t take care of this problem, they may go to the mailbox some day and not have a check that they were expecting,” said Republican Senate leader Christine Radogno.

The bill called for a number of changes to employees' retirement plans, including raising the retirement age and reducing cost of living increases in retirement.

Gov. Pat Quinn condemned the senate's vote, saying in a statement, “Failure to send me a comprehensive pension reform bill hurts our economy and costs Illinois taxpayers $17 million a day.”

Earlier this year, the Senate passed a rival pension plan that offers certain employees a choice between state subsidized health care or cost of living increases. Senate President John Cullerton has said that choice is critical to finding savings in the pension system while still obeying the state constitution.

With lawmakers scheduled to adjourn Friday, it's not clear what a compromise between the House and the Senate will look like.

Meantime, the House of Representatives adopted a bill shifting the cost of pensions from the state onto universities and community colleges.

Universities had said the added costs will force them to raise tuition in the future, but those representing Illinois colleges still supported the measure.

“Why on earth they would agree to this is beyond me,” said Republican State Rep. Tom Cross.

In a committee Thursday, a spokesman representing universities said Illinois’ public universities wanted to be a part of helping the state with its public pension funding problem.

Tony Arnold covers Illinois politics for WBEZ. Follow him @tonyjarnold.

The Ghost of Illinois Pensions Yet to Come

Wed, 19 Dec 2012 16:36:00 -0600

Earlier this week we received a visit from the Ghosts of Pensions Past which shed light on how Illinois came to have the worst-funded pension system in the country. Basically, for decades Springfield chronically shortchanged the pension piggybank – not unlike Ebenezer Scrooge.

Now, we continue our series by looking at how we dig ourselves out of this mess with a visit from the Ghost of Pensions Yet To Come. What will Illinois state employees be saying about their retirement plans 30 years from now, based on the decisions made today?

If you’re still not sure how bad Illinois’ current pension crisis is, well, clearly you haven’t been paying much attention to Gov. Pat Quinn. Quinn has compared the current pension situation to the Battle at Waterloo, the sinking of the Titanic and more recently, the fiscal cliff. He's even talked about it in somewhat cosmic terms.

"We can accomplish something that will last far beyond our years here on earth," Quinn said earlier this month.

Basically what you need to know is this: Illinois is $95 billion dollars in the hole when it comes to funding its state worker’s pensions systems. It took decades for the state to get in this fix. And it may take at least that long to get out of it, which is why the governor often talks in terms of legacy. Whatever is done to deal with pensions now could have an impact on the state’s finances for the long haul.

It’s a thorny problem, one that has bedeviled Illinois politicians for years. So the question now is, who will answer the call?

Well, Daniel Biss for one. Biss is fairly new to the Illinois Statehouse and represents the 17th District in the House of Representatives. When the north suburban Democrat was first elected, he actually volunteered to serve on the two pension committees.

"Of course, I didn’t understand that nobody wants to be on the pension committee," Biss said in an interview.

When asked if the pensions committee was anything like sitting at the lunch table with the cool kids, Biss said, "You know, I come from mathematics. So I don’t even know how to find the cool kids table in the cafeteria, but I’m pretty sure this isn’t it."

Biss used to teach math, but not just any math. He taught algebraic topology.

"So what that was, still is, without me, is using algebraic structures to study higher dimensional geometric spaces," he said.

So if Biss can use algebraic structures to understand higher dimensional geometric spaces, then pensions should be a breeze, right?

"Well let me begin by leveling with you," Biss said. "It has not been the case that the exact work I did as a mathematician has carried over directly into pension work."

Okay, so who else we got?

How about Republican State Representative Mike Fortner? Fortner teachers physics at Northern Illinois University and is a particle physicist at Fermilab who’s spent 20 years studying the nature of matter.

But he also has been studying the state's pension situation.

"When I started looking at the pension problem, to me, seeing something that was growing too fast for our revenue, this looks like a math problem that you oughta be able to take a spreadsheet and unroll the spreadsheet and put in numbers and say, ‘What will it take to make the pension system sustainable?’" Fortner said.

Fortner may be onto something here. Let’s run with that math problem idea.

Imagine Professor Fortner and Professor Biss are standing at a chalkboard. If funding proposal x is added to proposal y is added to proposal z, what will it take to zero out the $95 billion pension debt?

There are lots of potential answers, some more divisive than others, but let’s look at just four of them.

Fortner likes the idea of giving employees’ a choice to enter into a plan similar to a 401K, where the employee manages their own investment strategy. He said some university employees around Illinois already have plans like this, so the state can more easily predict what it’s getting into.

"They have a choice as to what system they are going into," Fortner said.

Fortner said he’s crunched the numbers and this idea can work. Then again, many analysts say it won’t save enough money.

Retired state employees currently get pay bumps each year to help them keep up with the increasing costs of, well, everything. Biss said those pay bumps are expensive.

"I think everybody agrees you can’t solve the problem without having some impact on that," he said.

Biss has proposed delaying those pay increases to later in an employees’ retirement. But Fortner said the state has already committed to those pay bumps and they’d be hard to change.

Arguably the most controversial idea involves straight up changing who pays for pensions for downstate and suburban teachers. Currently, the state pays which Biss says makes no sense.

"If you were to blow everything up and restart, you would never come up with the current system," Biss said. "You would never say the school districts don’t even have the retirement costs of their employees on their budget."

This funding proposal would gradually make each school district pay. But Fortner says school districts would need more cash, which would have to come from somewhere.

"In the districts I represent, most of the revenue has to come from the property taxes and property taxes are already pretty high and that’s one thing that the public pretty frequently says, 'We don’t want to see higher property taxes,'" Fortner said.

And that brings us to the impact these will have on state employees who have been banking on these pensions. How do they feel?

"Truthfully, I don’t like the sound of a whole bunch of stuff," said Patricia Ousley, who has worked for the state’s unemployment office in Chicago for more than 36 years. She’s also very active in the union and is the president of Local 1006.

Ousley said she put in her money for retirement, but the state didn’t hold up its end of the bargain. Now she worries about all these new pension formulas and how they might affect someone like her who’s looking to retire soon.

"I do have grandkids and I spoil them when I can just because I can, because they’re grandkids," she said. "And you want to have money to do that and I think once I leave here, being on a set income, those things will be depleted somewhat. I won’t be able to do what I do now."

Ousley said she doesn’t know what it will take to make the pensions sustainable. But she suggests raising taxes.

The problem is almost everyone agrees that raising taxes isn’t going to fix the problem; that pension costs are rising too fast. So it will likely take more than one idea to get the state out of this jam, which brings up its own issues. Namely, a little thing called the Illinois Constitution.

"You have to understand that we have a constitution which is very specific about how you deal with changing pensions. You cannot unilaterally pass a law to reduce someone’s pension," said Illinois Senate President John Cullerton, who has his own plan.

Cullerton wants to offer state workers like Ousley a choice: take a cut in health care or take a cut in pay bumps retirees’ get every year.

Cullerton, who already passed the plan in the Senate, said the beauty of his formula is that employees get to choose. According to the Senate leader, that makes it the most legally sound option out there. But Biss, who would still have to vote for it in the House, is critical of the plan.

"On a human level, if you’re asking someone to choose between health care and their pension, it doesn’t feel like a positive choice," Biss said.

So where does this leave things?

Well, unfortunately it’s not just a math problem, it’s also a political and legal problem. If the courts strike down whatever may be approved, some lawmakers worry they’ll end up back at the chalkboard, essentially erasing all those equations for pension reform we mentioned.

That means future Illinoisans could be dealing with this for years to come.

If so, Daniel Biss’s kid already has a head start.

"My older son is four years old and the other day he was saying to my wife, 'Mommy, I just hope that I have a pension,'" Biss said. "I don’t know if he knows what a pension is, but he knows two things: One, that there are things that make you nervous, and two, there are things that you hope are going to be there for you.

That's something just about everyone can agree on.

Senate panel OKs licenses for illegal immigrants

Thu, 29 Nov 2012 12:00:00 -0600

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — Supporters of licensing illegal immigrants to drive say it would make Illinois roads safer with trained motorists required to carry insurance.

The Senate Executive Committee voted 12-2 Thursday to advance the plan for some of the 250,000 people living in Illinois illegally.

Lake County Sheriff Mark Curran told the committee unlicensed and uninsured illegal immigrants cause $64 million in damage claims each year — a cost covered by insured motorists' premiums.

Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno of Lemont says the plan is a good example of state law filling in where the federal government has failed to act.

The legislation's sponsor is Senate President John Cullerton. The Chicago Democrat says the licenses would be good for three years.

Cullerton tax transparency plan squeaks through Illinois Senate

Wed, 28 Nov 2012 15:49:00 -0600

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. —Illinois Senate President John Cullerton's plan to require corporations' income tax bills to be made public has barely won approval.

The Senate voted 30-27 Wednesday to okay a proposal Cullerton says would help lawmakers plan tax policy.

Cullerton says it’s hard to know how much in taxes companies like Sears or CME Group pay. So the Democrat says the proposal to make publicly traded companies share how much they pay in state taxes will create a more fair corporate tax system.

He says two-thirds of businesses doing work in Illinois pay no corporate income tax.

"It’s not a gotcha to the business community," Cullerton said from the floor of the Senate Wednesday. "It’s actually that (it) helps us have a better tax structure."

Republican State Sen. Chris Lauzen said it’s a punishing bill that’s anti-business and anti-employment, and it could drive companies away from the state.

"There are other states that are alternatives for employers to go to," Lauzen said.

Cullerton amended the bill to prevent posting of federally prohibited tax information.

Business leaders say the legislation unfairly targets some businesses.

The bill moves to the House.

Illinois pols swear they aren't communists

Mon, 23 Jan 2012 02:55:00 -0600

Three quarters of the candidates in Illinois for the U.S. House have signed a loyalty oath to the United States. The optional form, submitted along with ballot paperwork, asks candidates to swear they're not communists.

LOYALTY OATH: Read it (PDF)

You can rest assured that candidates signing the oath don't plan to teach or advocate for the overthrow of the government, and that they're not affiliated with any communist groups or communist-front groups.

The oath used to be mandatory, but a federal court decision four decades ago made it optional. And while communism isn't much of a campaign topic these days, the loyalty oath is still popular.

The signees, according to the state election board, include 56 current candidates for Congress in Illinois, including all incumbents except for Bobby Rush and Jan Schakowsky.

"As a loyal American I did not submit a loyalty oath because it is an unconstitutional vestige of McCarthyism and a direct violation of the fundamental values that make America great," Schakowsky explained in a statement.

Three of Illinois' four state legislative leaders signed the loyalty oath, with Senate President John Cullerton the only exception.

A signed oath was included among the paperwork by two presidential candidates on the ballot in Illinois: former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and the former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania, Rick Santorum. The others who filed - President Barack Obama, Texas U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and former Louisiana Gov. Charles "Buddy" Roemer - did not turn in the loyalty oath.

WHO SIGNED IT? Full list from election board (PDF)

Illinois U.S. House District	Candidate	Loyalty Oath
1	* Bobby L. Rush (D)	Not filed
1	Clifford M. Russell, Jr. (D)	Filed
1	Jordam Sims (D)	Filed
1	Fred Smith (D)	Filed
1	Raymond M. Lodato (D)	Not filed
1	Harold L. Bailey (D)	Filed
1	Frederick Collins (R)	Filed
1	Donald E. Peloquin (R)	Filed
1	Jimmy Lee Tillman II (R)	Not filed
2	* Jesse L. Jackson, Jr. (D)	Filed
2	Deborah "Debbie" Halvorson (D)	Filed
2	James H. Taylor, Sr. (R)	Not filed
2	Brian Woodworth (R)	Filed
3	* Daniel William Lipinski (D)	Filed
3	Farah Baqai (D)	Filed
3	Arthur J. Jones (R)	Filed
3	Richard L. Grabowski (R)	Filed
3	Jim Falvey (R)	Filed
4	* Luis V. Gutierrez (D)	Filed
5	* Mike Quigley (D)	Filed
5	Dan Schmitt (R)	Filed
6	Leslie Coolidge (D)	Not filed
6	Geoffrey Petzel (D)	Filed
6	Tim Ritter (D)	Not filed
6	Maureen E. Yates (D)	Filed
6	* Peter J. Roskam (R)	Filed
7	Jacques A. Conway (D)	Filed
7	* Danny K. Davis (D)	Filed
8	Raja Krishnamoorthi (D)	Filed
8	Tammy Duckworth (D)	Not filed
8	Robert Gregory Canfield (R)	Not filed
8	Richard Evans (R)	Not filed
8	* Joe Walsh (R)	Filed
9	* Janice D. Schakowsky (D)	Not filed
9	Simon Ribeiro (D)	Not filed
9	Timothy C. Wolfe (R)	Filed
9	Susanne Atanus (R)	Not filed
10	Vivek Bavda (D)	Filed
10	Brad Schneider (D)	Not filed
10	Ilya Sheyman (D)	Filed
10	John Tree (D)	Filed
10	Aloys Rutagwibira (D)	Not filed
10	* Robert Dold (R)	Filed
11	Bill Foster (D)	Filed
11	Jim Hickey (D)	Filed
11	Juan Thomas (D)	Filed
11	* Judy Biggert (R)	Filed
11	John A. "Jack" Cunningham (R)	Filed
11	Diane M. Harris (R)	Filed
12	Brad Harriman (D)	Filed
12	Christopher Miller (D)	Filed
12	Kenneth Charles Weizer (D)	Filed
12	Rodger Cook (R)	Filed
12	Jason Plummer (R)	Filed
12	Theresa Kormos (R)	Filed
12	Teri Newman (R)	Not filed
13	David M. Gill (D)	Filed
13	Matthew J. Goetten (D)	Filed
13	Michael Firsching (R)	Not filed
13	* Tim Johnson (R)	Filed
13	Frank L. Metzger (R)	Filed
14	Dennis Anderson (D)	Filed
14	Jonathan Farnick (D)	Not filed
14	* Randy M. Hultgren (R)	Filed
15	Angela Michael (D)	Not filed
15	* John M. Shumkus (R)	Filed
16	* Adam Kinzinger (R)	Filed
16	* Donald A. Manzullo (R)	Filed
17	Greg Aguilar (D)	Filed
17	Cheri Bustos (D)	Filed
17	George Gaulrapp (D)	Filed
17	* Bobby Schilling (R)	Filed
18	Steve Waterworth (D)	Not filed
18	Matthew A. Woodmancy (D)	Filed
18	* Aaron Schock (R)	Filed
18	Darrel Miller (R)	Not filed

(* indicates incumbent member of Congress)

Illinois' high court: More defamation suits can go forward

Fri, 20 Jan 2012 19:11:00 -0600

A ruling issued Friday morning by the Illinois Supreme Court means more defamation lawsuits involving public figures can go forward. The decision could help a former candidate for Chicago alderman who sued his opponent over negative advertising.

RULING: Sandholm v. Kuecker et al.

Illinois courts have interpreted the 2007 Citizen Participation Act to apply to any statement aimed at getting the government to do what you want. If that was your true goal, you could not be sued for defamation.

But on Friday, the Illinois Supreme Court reined in the lower courts. The justices unanimously found that lawmakers were trying to prevent "only meritless, retaliatory" suits aimed at stopping people from speaking out. If a plaintiff who feels they've been defamed is "genuinely seeking relief for damages," the court said the suit can proceed.

The justices said that was true in the case at hand, in which a Dixon high school basketball coach, Steve Sandholm, sued members of his community who claimed he abused his players.

The decision could also help John Garrido, who ran for Chicago alderman and later sued labor unions and his opponent over campaign ads he alleges were lies. That case was thrown out using the Citizen Participation Act, leaving Garrido on the hook for the defendants' many thousands in legal fees. The court's ruling Friday essentially writes Garrido's appeal for him.

Garrido said Friday he was "definitely pleased with this decision" by the Supreme Court.

A spokesperson for Illinois Senate President John Cullerton, who sponsored the 2007 legislation, said the court's interpretation of the legislature's intent was correct.

"The Senate President wants to encourage civic engagement by protecting the rights of people to voice their concerns with public policies and actions," Rikeesha Phelon said in an email. "Those protections were not designed to...provide safe harbor for those who promote mistruths and lies. For that reason, [Cullerton] believes that the court made the right decision."

The American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, however, is unlikely to be pleased by the ruling, as it was one of several groups who filed briefs in support of the Sandholm defendants. Asked for comment on the court's ruling, ACLU spokesman Edward Yohnka said the staff was still "reading and digesting the opinion."

"It is complicated and complicates the application of the CPA in Illinois," Yohnka wrote in an email.