Here is U.S. News and World Report (yes, it’s still in business) introducing our topic, the Obama Library:

Chicago: Obama Library Infrastructure Could Total $175M

CHICAGO (AP) — Private dollars will pay for building former President Barack Obama’s library, but road and other work near the Chicago site could cost taxpayers.

The city’s transportation department estimates that the cost of widening streets and building at least four new underpasses near the site in Jackson Park may total $175 million.

From the same article (This is embarrassing):

In January, more than 100 University of Chicago faculty members signed a letter urging the Obama Foundation to find a different location for the center.

Blair Kamin and Mary Wisniewski writing in the Chicago Tribune say that some believe costs to the public will run even higher than $175 million:

Margaret Schmid, co-president of the community group Jackson Park Watch, questioned the city’s $175 million estimate, saying the potential cost of the additional pedestrian underpasses would likely boost the total beyond that.

For years I have questioned the need for presidential libraries, and this entire Obama library episode is a perfect example of why.

The word boondoggle fits well:

boon·dog·gle:

noun: work or activity that is wasteful or pointless but gives the appearance of having value.

verb: to waste money or time on unnecessary or questionable projects.

American Thinker’s founder and editor Thomas Lifson has been on the case of the Obama Library since at least 2014. His writings about it has been both entertaining and informative. Here are a few of his early headlines:

Powerful Illinois political boss wants state taxpayers to pony up $100 million for Obama presidential library

Illinois voters don’t want tax money going for Obama library

Report: Obama library to be built in America’s most corrupt major city

Here is what Lifson wrote last October:

Ironic: Obama Presidential Center sparks community opposition in the cradle of community organizing

On the very turf that gave birth to Saul Alinsky’s version of community organizing, community activists are rising in opposition to the impact of building a huge mausoleum-like memorial to Barack Obama. Young Barack Obama relocated to Chicago in order to study at the feet of Saul Alinsky, who had powered the  Woodlawn Organization to historic prominence as a prototype of community organizing.

Members of the Midway Plaisance Advisory Council (MPAC) have been critical of plans, and the feared Friends of the Park has aligned itself “with local causes” related to the Barack Obama Presidential Center.

If Obama thought a Republican-run Congress was difficult to deal with, now he’s up against the Friends of the Park (FOP), a group notorious for their hardcore stances on projects related to Chicago’s lakefront. Here is part of a recent statement from FOP:

Friends of the Parks remains extremely excited about the Obama Presidential Center coming to Chicago’s south side. And we’re glad that our hometown, former president considers equitable investment in Chicago’s parks to be important. We agree with him on that. What we don’t agree on is the appropriateness of long-term disinvestment in parks that culminates in the all-too-common argument that the only way to fix a park is to build a building in it.

. . .

We are saddened by Obama’s dismissiveness toward the many Chicagoans who dare to express opposing views or the need for appropriate vetting and review, not the least of which is the federally-required Section 106/NEPA review. Apparently, he’s been away long enough that he has forgotten how the “City that Works” works. On a daily basis, we Chicagoans suffer the consequences of poor public policy decisions that stem from inadequate long-term planning, transparency, and oversight.

Whaaat? Obama is being accused of “talking down” to people and being dismissive of opposing views?

Wait, there’s more. Again, here’s Lifson:

High-handed Obama Presidential Center is losing community support

[Obama’s] desire to have a monument to himself in the form of the “Obama Presidential Center” (not a library, and not part of the National Archives System) is roiling community organizations who are not convinced that their park should be sacrificed to build a large shrine to the 44th president.

In fact, revisions to the initial plans have not mollified the opposition. Revised plans unveiled made the project even taller and more grandiose (and less white).

It’s no wonder Barack likes to travel overseas where his audiences are less aware of his real legacy and probably less aware of his arrogance and narcissism.

For more information, follow these links:

Black activists shout ‘Shame on you!’ at Chicago aldermen supporting Obama Presidential Center

Plans revised for ‘Obama Presidential Center’: Taller, uglier, and a little bit less white

Obama non-library ‘presidential center’ in Chicago devolving into a fiasco

IFI Worldview Conference May 5th

We have rescheduled our annual Worldview Conference featuring well-know apologist John Stonestreet for Saturday, May 5th at Medinah Baptist Church. Mr. Stonestreet is s a dynamic speaker and the award-winning author of “Making Sense of Your World” and his newest offer: “A Practical Guide to Culture.”

Join us for a wonderful opportunity to take enhance your biblical worldview and equip you to more effectively engage the culture.

Click HERE to learn more or to register!

Early Voting is already underway and the printed IFI Voter Guides are going fast!  In case you’re not aware, early voting has been proven to win elections for pro-family candidates! And every vote is valuable!

If you haven’t yet placed a bulk order for Voter Guides, please give us a call at the IFI office today at (708) 781-9328 or click HERE to email us your order.

These non-partisan Voter Guides comply with IRS guidelines and are legal for churches to distribute. Or you may simply want them to pass along to neighbors, co-workers and family.

Check our online version as it is being updated regularly.

It’s critical that people be informed voters when they cast their ballots in the March 20th Primary Election.  Not only are there eight sets of candidates running for Governor/Lt. Governor, many more candidates are running for seats in the Illinois House and Illinois Senate.  Add to that the fact that all 18 seats of the U.S. House of Representative are up for election too.

We are coming down to the wire.  The election is only five weeks away.  So don’t delay. Call us at (708) 781-9328 or email us today.

Background
Do you and your friends know where the state-wide and federal candidates stand on abortion, conscience rights, tax funding for Planned Parenthood, expanded gambling, income taxes, “recreational” marijuana and religious liberty? These Voter Guides will be the only source of information for many to make an informed decision.

But thousands of other Illinois citizens don’t know about the IFI Voter Guide. You can help provide them with this critical information, in the cause of good government, to make informed choices about all the state and federal candidates on the ballot.

We want Illinois citizens to have access to the IFI Voter Guide and we need your help in getting it into the hands of as many voters as we can, so order a dozen or more and give them to your friends, family and co-workers.

Americans have been given incredible blessings and freedoms; and as a result, we have a responsibility to participate in elections. Thank God we have an opportunity to cast our ballot for men and women whose values represent our own.

With your participation, together we will make a great impact in the state of Illinois and our republic, one vote at a time.

IFI depends on the support of concerned-citizens like you. Donate now

-and, please-

Why is the Illinois Family Institute publishing another article about state government employee pensions? Because excessive taxes in Illinois are putting a strain on Illinois families — and 25 percent of our state budget pays those overly-generous pensions.

Now, policy experts Ted Dabrowski and John Klingner have provided yet more evidence that “A dramatic rise in pension benefits — not funding shortfalls — caused Illinois’ state pension crisis.”

People like pension expert Bill Zettler pointing out that out a dozen years ago. Whenever I have the opportunity, I mention it as well in my articles. Did people believe Zettler or me? It doesn’t matter — now they must contend with Dabrowski and Klingner.

Their new report is linked here:

Illinois state pensions: Overpromised, not underfunded – Wirepoints Special Report

Wirepoints also has articles about it here:

Illinois politicians: stop guilting taxpayers

Illinois’ pension crisis: Incompetence or malice?

Here is just an excerpt from that last link:

The actual growth in benefits handed out to state workers and retirees since 1987 has dwarfed everything else in the economy, from incomes to inflation to population to the state budget. Multiples times over.

This has all kinds of obvious implications for the economy, growth, outmigration and most importantly, the lives of ordinary Illinoisans.

Pension growth — at nearly 9 percent a year for 30 years — is swamping everything else. It’s no wonder why Illinoisans in so many parts of the state are struggling with high taxes, weak job prospects and stagnant incomes.

Also, Dabrowski calls it corrupt (as I do):

[A] financial mess like this would normally be investigated. Any business that ignores or hides a massive liability for decades will end up on the brink of, or in, bankruptcy.

. . .

If this state were a corporation, think Enron or Worldcom, all kinds of regulators would be sniffing around and asking all kinds of questions. How did lawmakers get this so wrong? Was the extreme growth in benefits due to incompetence or was it purposeful?

“Though the odds of a real investigation happening in Illinois are zilch,” Dabrowski writes, “it’s still worth asking the right questions.”

The answers are easy, as Bill Zettler wrote in his book. The system is a scam, orchestrated and carried out by those betting that taxpayers will never learn just how ridiculously high the retirement benefits are for many saintly teachers, school administrators, union officials, and various other groups employed by our governments.

Illinois continues to make national news due to its inability to do basic math. Here are a few examples:

Rising Tax Rate Can’t End Illinois’ Economic Drought
Yet leading candidates to replace Gov. Bruce Rauner think the only problem with the state’s income tax rate is that it doesn’t go high enough.

In Illinois, Public Pension Funding Cannot Keep up with Pension Benefits’ Growth
Pension benefits have grown six times more that state revenues, 8.4 times more than household incomes, and 9.5 times more than inflation. A major driver of this benefit growth is collective bargaining, which allows government employee unions to negotiate with public officials over pay, benefits, working conditions, and other matters. Unlike in the private sector, where employers have strong incentives to rein in labor costs, public sector unions face relatively little employer resistance to their demands, since both sides in the negotiations are employed by government.

Here are two quick things from Pension Pulse:

The Pension Storm Cometh?
Public employee unions have managed to extract promises from state and local governments that are simply impossible to keep. And those governments have been papering over the extent of their obligations with accounting assumptions that are so overly-optimistic as to be deceptive.

In this article, Pension Pulse touches on the legal wrangling over the pension systems:

The way the courts interpret the pension promise may be legally sound but it is economically absurd.

Who made this “legally sound”? Our AWOL conservative elected officials at all levels, who have failed to bring attention to this kind of excess.

I must say, though, I love the use of the word “absurd.”

IFI depends on the support of Christians like you. Donate now

-and, please-

The judicial branch at both the state and federal level continues to overstep their authority by meddling in the affairs of the legislative and executive branches. And the audacity of judges appears to be increasing.

Just two weeks ago the Chicago Tribune reported this:

A judge has ordered Illinois officials to add intractable pain as a qualifying condition for medical marijuana, a ruling that could greatly expand access to the drug.

The Illinois Department of Public Health had rejected intractable pain — defined as pain that’s resistant to treatment — but Cook County Judge Raymond Mitchell ordered the agency to add the condition.

A health department spokeswoman said Tuesday the agency will appeal the ruling. The change is expected to be put on hold while the appeal is pursued.

If Cook County Judge Raymond Mitchell wants to set policy, he should run for governor or for a seat in the General Assembly.

At the federal level, several judges seem to have joined the #Resistance movement to block President Donald Trump’s Constitutionally lawful actions.

Whether it is concerning sanctuary cities and states, Trump’s actions on limiting immigration, DACA, or transgenders in the military, courts are getting into the act by pretending to hold executive or legislative power.

Those federal judges who choose to ignore the U.S. Constitution and statutes should be impeached. Those aren’t my words, but Tom Trinko’s over at American Thinker:

[J]udges who issue insane edicts must be impeached. It’s time for the people to voice the truth that judges are not some “super” agents who override the authority of the people’s representatives.

Trinko blasts the courts’ “Judicial Rebellion”:

We are witnessing a treasonous rebellion by leftist judges who are declaring the last election null and void.

At the core of these traitors’ arguments is the belief that the people do not have the right to express their views through the electoral process.

Essentially, these courts are declaring that President Trump doesn’t have the same authority as his predecessor and that the powers of the executive branch are constrained by what the judiciary thinks is good policy.

As hot as that rhetoric might sound, what Trinko writes next shows that it isn’t:

These judges assert that President Trump can’t overrule the executive orders of his predecessor with his own executive orders. If that were the case, elections would be meaningless, since one president could effectively prevent the people from rejecting his position by voting for a candidate who disagreed with him.

Writing at National Review, Josh Blackman penned a piece titled, “A Ludicrous Ruling That Trump Can’t End DACA.” In it he sarcastically writes:

On January 20, 2017, the executive power peacefully transitioned from President Obama to President Trump. At least one judge in San Francisco didn’t get the memo.

Later in the article, Blackman writes:

I am unable to think of any decision where a court has ordered a president to exercise discretionary authority he has deemed unconstitutional.

Concerning one court’s excursion into military policy, American Thinker’s Joe Herring wrote:

A federal judge has ventured far beyond mere judicial activism in declaring that the president cannot alter the policy of his predecessor regarding men who consider themselves women, and vice versa, serving in the military.

In effect, this judge has deemed President Trump to no longer be commander-in-chief.

. . .

This is a gross usurpation of power that, if permitted, establishes a precedent for any federal judge to stay the hand of the president in the conduct of war. This egregious overreach must be resisted and punished.

Resistance and punishment, however, require courage on the part of the other two branches. Congress can strip jurisdiction from the courts, and the President can ignore court “orders” that are clearly out of bounds.

Short of that, Herring writes, “one federal judge can illegally stop the president from exercising his constitutional power for months or years.”

The medical and recreational marijuana debate is not an issue for the courts, but for the people through their elected representatives in the legislative and executive branches. Courts that seek to amend legislation or limit or direct constitutionally or legislatively granted executive powers should be, at a minimum, ignored.

If the citizens of the United States are to have a constitutional government, the legislative and executive branches must push back at the judicial branch’s overreach. Not only would that action begin to deter bad behavior by judges, it would be a learning moment for the part of the country that never received a proper education concerning our state and federal Constitutions.

Subscribe to the IFI YouTube channel
and never miss a video report or special program!

As Illinois continues to lose population (we are now the sixth largest state, not the fifth), our politicians in both parties continue to run up debt and unfunded liabilities.

Here is Meaghan Kilroy writing at Pensions & Investments (www.pionline.com):

Illinois has the highest pension burden among all 50 states, said Fitch Ratings’ 2017 state pension report released Tuesday.

According to the report, Illinois’ unfunded pension liabilities amounted to 22.8% of residents’ personal income at the end of fiscal year 2016, compared to a median 3.1% for all states and 1% for Florida, the least burdened state.

Since it is the Christmas season, I chose not to title this article “The Dumbest People in America.” But how else do you describe a state that has 25 percent of its budget going to pay government employee pensions and its voters who continue electing the same people who won’t do a thing about it? And “[u]nder Fitch’s calculations, Illinois’ net pension liabilities totaled $151.5 billion at the end of fiscal year 2016.” Please know that other sources calculate that number as substantially higher.

The Wall Street Journal recently featured a related article titled “Illinois Drives People Away: The taxpayer migration continues from the Land of Ever Higher Taxes.”

Makes you proud, doesn’t it?

From the Journal article:

The Prairie State lost a record $4.75 billion in adjusted gross income to other states in the 2015 tax year, according to recently IRS released data. That’s up from $3.4 billion in the prior year. Many of the migrants were retirees who often flock to balmier climes. But millennials accounted for more than a third of the net outflow in tax returns.

. . .

Too much for us to distill in one editorial, but suffice to say that exorbitant property and business taxes have retarded economic growth. Illinois’s corporate tax rate is 9.5%, and pass-through business owners pay 6.45%. Though Illinois’s flat 4.95% income tax rate is relatively low compared to its neighbors, Democrats have found other ways to clobber their citizens.

You can let your eyes glaze over at these numbers if you want, but understand that you will be paying more every year if you do.

To paraphrase one radio talk show philosopher — we should all be able to tie half of our brain behind our back and still realize something is amiss.

This helps explain why Illinois’s economy has been stagnant, growing a meager 0.9% on an inflation-adjusted annual basis since 2012—the slowest in the Great Lakes and half as fast as the U.S. overall. This year nearly 100,000 individuals have left the Illinois labor force. The University of Illinois Flash Economic Index, which measures corporate earnings and investment as well as personal income, hit a five-year low in October.

Merry Christmas! Feeling poor yet? Well, at least we know our retired government employees will be enjoying the holidays.

In a recent op ed, Illinois policy experts Ted Dabrowski and John Klingner put it rather simply when referring to what Illinois politicians are increasingly good at: “they offer government worker retirement benefits that are no longer affordable to the residents that pay for them.”

Illinois News Network recently quoted State Sen. Dan McConchie, R-Hawthorn Woods:

Whether it’s through their property taxes or because of the recent income tax increase, they just can’t afford to [stay here].… This day of reckoning is fast approaching us. I don’t think we want to wait until the absolute last minute to try and do everything we can to really right the ship.

Allow me to define reckoning: It is time to stop talking about “reforming” the government employee pension systems in Illinois. You cannot reform what is purposefully corrupt and completely insolvent.

The Illinois Constitution’s line prohibiting the lowering of government employee benefits should be ignored if it’s not repealed. No clause in a constitution can make this math work. The systems should be cut off from the taxpayers and sent into bankruptcy.

Any candidate suggesting that the pension systems can be reformed is not telling you the truth.

Happy New Year!

End-of-Year Challenge

As you may know, IFI has a year-end matching challenge to raise $160,000. That’s right, a great group of IFI supporters are colluding with us to provide an $80,000 matching challenge to help support IFI’s ongoing work to educate, motivate and activate Illinois’ Christian community.

Please consider helping us reach this goal!  Your donation will help us stand strong in 2018!  To make a credit card donation over the phone, please call the IFI office at (708) 781-9328.  You can also send a gift to:

Illinois Family Institute
P.O. Box 876
Tinley Park, Illinois 60477

Adam Andrzejewski, the founder of the Illinois-based national transparency organization Open the Books, recently spoke at Harvard University calling upon Americans to exercise their power as citizens.

“I am hopeful and optimistic about our future in Illinois,” he began. If you are one of the millions of Illinoisans who are frustrated with the condition of Illinois, you might be curious how Andrzejewski can be hopeful and optimistic in light of the many governmental problems we read about every day. Here is his answer:

[T]he reason I am is that in America, we the people—the citizen is sovereign — our rights are enshrined in our founding documents. Our founders knew that knowledge is power, and they wrote transparency into our founding documents.

They understood that transparency was so important they made it a part of the U.S. Constitution.

This is from Article I, Section 9:

“No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.”

That defines the mission of Open the Books. “We can’t make America great again,” he said, “unless we make government accountable again.”

During his speech, Andrzejewski cited an array of governmental scandals that came to light as a result of Open the Books. Among them were:

• Tens of millions of dollars spent by government on public relations (the government using your money to encourage even more government spending).

• The Environmental Protection Agency spending millions on expensive office furniture and weapons.

• The Veterans Affairs department hiring far more bureaucrats than doctors, even as veterans died while waiting to see a VA doctor.

• Billions of dollars in small business loans being provided by the Small Business Administration to large corporations.

These days there is a lot to read and listen to — and we all only have so much time, however, Andrzejewski’s speech, which runs about 30 minutes, is a positive call to action at time when really bad news seems to outnumber the merely bad news here in Illinois.

“We need to start fighting on hard facts — and when we engage in these subjects and we show exactly what’s going on — when we fight, we win,” he said.

A bold voice for pro-family values in Illinois!

Click HERE to learn about supporting IFI on a monthly basis.

Here was the headline: “Soros Shifts $18 Billion To Foundation He Uses To Fund Left.” That is not a typo. $18 billion with a B. This guy is serious about seeing Leftism advanced. The facts about that “shift” of dollars are presented by Aly Nielsen at NewsBusters.org.

By now, most people who follow politics are aware of George Soros and his generous funding of radical Leftist issues and organizations around the world.

Here are the opening paragraphs of Nielsen’s article:

Left-wing financier George Soros just nearly tripled the size of his foundation by adding an additional $18 billion in assets. The foundation has funded liberal activism on immigration, abortion, journalism and a myriad of other issues. Its soon-to-be president was also formerly a DNC executive director.

Soros transferred the billions to Open Society Foundations (OSF) from his hedge fund, Soros Fund Management, The Wall Street Journal reported on Oct. 17, 2017. The transfer increased OSF’ assets from $7.3 billion (according to Foundation Directory) to $25.3 billion.

Here are a few details from the article put into bullet points:

• Soros has given away roughly $14 billion throughout his lifetime.

• Soros has also funneled more than $103 million to journalism groups around the world including ProPublica, NPR and Columbia University.

• Soros also gave at least $10.5 million to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

• Media outlets that backed her campaign or policies had received an additional $61 million in prior years.

• OSF operates in seven different global regions including the U.S., Africa, Latin America and Europe.

• Through the various OSF branches, Soros has started revolutions, undermined national currencies and funded radical groups throughout the world.

There are a lot more colorful details in the article, but my focus is the money:

By transferring $18 billion to OSF, Soros has signaled he intends this left-wing agenda to remain well-funded long after his death.

Soros is 87 years old.

At American Thinker, Rick Moran wrote about this news item as well: “Soros transfers most of his wealth to Open Society Foundations.”

Two sentences from the article: “The foundation said it is the second-largest in the world after the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.” “The Wall Street Journal estimates Soros’s net worth at $23 billion.”

Note this good point as well: “Suffice it to say, infusing his foundation with that much cash will free up other resources for partisan campaign donations.”

Soros isn’t the only big money person funding Leftist causes, of course, but he’s the biggest dog. Another big dog is Tom Steyer (read more about him here). Steyer is worth an entirely separate article since he is funding an effort to impeach President Trump. Tech magnates have also made headlines over the past few years as they have written enormous checks to left-wing causes. J.B. Pritzker, another Leftist billionaire, is running for governor in Illinois.

The Lefty titans get it — everything in politics costs money. If you want your political agenda to succeed, it requires money money money.

There are a few good examples on the political right where conservative donors are adding more zeros to the checks they write. But many more of our big dogs need to realize that funding a building with their name on it at their alma mater is not going to save the country from the Leftist agenda.

The only way conservatives save the country is if we have the money to fight. The large PACs and the large think tanks are adequately funded, but the best fighters are many of the small, underfunded groups. I’ll name just two here — the Illinois Family Institute and Illinois Family Action (there are many more here and around the country).

Often the smaller organizations are more aggressive and less concerned with being politically correct. Their effectiveness would greatly increase with more funds to hire more staff to oversee more campaigns and events to reach more people. The decades-old think tanks are happy to operate the same as they always have while expecting a different result.

A few years ago I wrote (and rewrote) a series of articles on this topic — it starts with this one. In one, I included this story:

In August of 1781, our Southern forces had trapped Lieutenant General Charles Cornwallis in the little Virginia coastal town of Yorktown. George Washington and the main army and the Count de Rochambeau with his French army decided to march from the Hudson Highlands to Yorktown and deliver the final blow. But Washington’s war chest was completely empty, as was that of Congress. Washington determined that he needed at least $20,000 to finance the campaign.

When Morris told him there were no funds and no credit available, Washington gave him a simple but eloquent order: “Send for Haym Salomon”. Haym again came through, and the $20.000 was raised. Washington conducted the Yorktown campaign, which proved to be the final battle of the Revolution, thanks to Haym Salomon.

“Send for Haym Salomon.” Even the Father of his country needed funding — and he knew where to turn.

Here is an invitation to those conservatives who can write checks to fund a much-needed communications revolution from sea to shining sea. Wealthy donors need to start exercising a little critical thinking, and stop supporting organizations that don’t have a vision and start funding those that do such as IFI and IFA.

A bold voice for pro-family values in Illinois!

Click HERE to learn about supporting IFI on a monthly basis.

Despite his commitment to veto HB 40, Governor Bruce Rauner has approved HB 40 — which requires taxpayers to fund the intentional murder of pre-born human beings through Medicaid and state employee insurance plans.  During the 2017 Spring session of the Illinois General Assembly, Democratic lawmakers passed  House Bill 40 on a party line vote (62-55 in the House on April 25th and 33 to 22 in the Senate on May 22nd).

Based on the increased number of new Medicaid recipients in the last 5 years, Illinois taxpayers will now be complicit in the deaths of 10,000 to 15,000 more babies every year. State Rep. Peter Breen (R-Lombard) is on record saying that it may cost us up to $60 million per year!

Since the vast majority of Illinois voters have been historically against using their tax dollars for abortion, it would be wise for pro-life advocates and voters to turn these brazen tactics back against left-wing abortion fanatics – Republican or Democrat. We must continue to speak out and we must be proactive and work to convince legislators at every level of government of the sanctity of life from conception to natural death.

Click HERE to read more from Illinois Family Action, our (501c4) sister organization.

IFI depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

-and, please-

Great news from the congressional front!

In light of the possibility that Governor Bruce Rauner may renege on his commitment to veto HB 40—the bill that would require taxpayer-funding of abortions through Medicaid and state employee insurance plans through the entire 9 months of pregnancies—and the moral gravity of such an obscene (and costly) requirement, Illinois Family Institute Executive Director David Smith sent a letter to Illinois’ Republican congressmen requesting their help in persuading Governor Rauner to veto HB 40.

Earlier today, U.S. Congressmen Peter Roskam, John Shimkus, Randy Hultgren, Adam Kinzinger, Rodney Davis, Mike Bost, and Darin LaHood sent a letter to Governor Rauner urging him to do just that:

Dear Governor Rauner:

We are writing to convey our deepest concern about House Bill 40 which has been sent to your desk.

This bill would require taxpayers to subsidize abortions for those covered by Medicaid and for those covered by state employee health insurance through the full nine months of pregnancy. This includes painful late-term abortions, even past the point at which some children could survive outside the womb if given appropriate care.  Under HB 40, there is no cap on the number of abortions that could be covered under Medicaid and no cap on the amount of taxpayer dollars spent on these procedures.  Current estimates of cost to the State range from$1.8 million to $21 million.  While Illinois faces a financial crisis, it is unwise to place such a burden on the taxpayers.

Illinois state policy has been consistent with federal protections such as the Hyde Amendment which prohibits federal funding for abortion. The Hyde Amendment saves lives – at least 2 million people are alive today thanks to 40 years of Hyde Amendment protections.  This bill is an egregious step away from those protections by requiring public funding for abortions, which will surely result in more lives lost to the tragedy of abortion.

As you have said yourself, this bill wrongfully requires taxpayers to participate in funding abortions. While the political pressure may feel extreme, we respectfully ask you to focus on the underlying issue and not waiver on your commitment to protect taxpayers as well as the most vulnerable members of our community.  We ask you to veto this harmful legislation.

David Smith emphasizes the significance of this letter, particularly in conjunction with the unanimity of opposition to HB 40 among state lawmakers:

This letter to Gov. Rauner is vitally important. The entire Illinois House Republican Caucus and Illinois Senate Republican Caucus are uniformly opposed to HB 40. Now the Illinois Republican Congressional Delegation has weighed in opposing this legislation. I can only hope and pray that this puts tremendous pressure on our Republican Governor to veto this legislation.

I hope and pray other pro-life elected leaders will also speak out. We may not be able to overturn Roe v. Wade yet, but if enough conservatives speak out and overwhelm the governor’s office, we just might protect thousands of babies from the horror of abortion in Illinois.

Though there is a legal right for women to have their offspring killed, such a “right” does not confer on the public an obligation to pay for the deaths of these tiny human beings. In addition, aiding and abetting women in killing their own children is neither just, nor merciful, nor morally defensible.

The dismissively called “social issues” are fundamental cultural issues and crucibles that determine the moral worthiness of a society. Illinois Republican lawmakers deserve our thanks for their support for the lives of humans in the womb.

Will Republican Governor Rauner stand with pro-life, small government lawmakers in Congress and the General Assembly or will he stand with pro-abortion, big government Leftists?

Take ACTION: Click Here to email Governor Bruce Rauner. Urge him to keep his pledge to veto HB 40. Also, please continue to call the governor’s public comment line every day until this is resolved: (217) 782-0244 and (312) 814-2121. 

You can also send Gov. Rauner a message via Twitter: @GovRauner

Read Congressman Peter Roskam’s press release on this issue HERE.

Listen to Laurie read this article in this podcast:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/The-Illinois-GOP-Congressional-Caucus-Responds-to-HB-40.mp3

PLEASE consider a financial gift to IFI to sustain our work.
We’ve stood firm for 25 years, work diligently to accomplish our mission to
“boldly bring a biblical perspective to public policy” in Illinois.

The Illinois Family Institute (IFI) and its sister organization Illinois Family Action (IFA) have posted “about” pages that summarize each group’s mission on their respective websites (IFI, IFA).

Occasionally IFI and IFA receive notes from friends and allies questioning some aspect of the organizations’ activities. One recent email expressed concern over our coverage of the tax code debate and other policy issues that the sender viewed as irrelevant to what he believes is IFI’s or IFA’s mission to advocate for conservative positions on only the social issues.

There are some IFI/IFA supporters who are “social issues” conservatives and, therefore, do not think IFI or IFA should take positions on economic issues. They request that IFI/IFA “not mix the two,” saying that “Jesus never took a political side,” and “Neither should you if you claim to speak with a Christian voice.”

Author and radio talk show host Dr. Michael Brown wrote a column on this topic, articulating the questions with which Christians wrestle:

Is it dangerous for Christian leaders to mix politics and religion? Is that a confusion of their calling? Or is it important for Christian leaders to address all areas of life, including politics?

In response to letters from people who agree with him on the social issues, Dr. Brown wrote the following:

Would Paul or Peter or John have gotten involved in the presidential elections? Would they have endorsed a candidate or advised a candidate or commented on the various party platforms? Would they have even voted?

Some point to Jesus’ comment in John 18 when He said to Pilate shortly before His crucifixion, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36). If it were of this world, He explained, then His servants would have been fighting for him not to be delivered up to His captors.

But in saying this, Jesus hardly meant that we should not be involved in the affairs of this world. After all, feeding the hungry and clothing the poor and educating our children and working our jobs are all “of this world.” Should we stop doing these things and simply go on a mountaintop to pray, waiting for the Lord’s return? (Of course, we’d soon have to figure out how to get food and where to sleep–all issues of this world.)

In reality, what Jesus was saying was this: “My kingship does not derive its authority from this world’s order of things. If it did, my men would have fought to keep me from being arrested by the Judeans. But my kingship does not come from here” (Jn. 18:36, CJB).

Just because we are “passing through this world” and “it is not our eternal home,” Brown writes, “doesn’t mean that we don’t fight against injustice or champion the cause of the needy, nor does it mean that we remain silent on important political and social issues.” Brown clarifies the responsibilities of Christians:

After all, slavery was the paramount hot-button, deeply-divisive, political and social issue of the 19th century, yet it would have been very wrong for Christian leaders to remain silent on this, just as it’s very wrong for Christian leaders to remain silent on issues like abortion and homosexual activism today.

Abortion. Marriage. Parental freedom regarding education. Religious liberty. Obscenity. Those are a few areas easily categorized as issues that have a clear moral impact.

What about energy policy? Foreign policy? Health care policy? Tax rates? And there are almost countless other areas where government spending doesn’t seem to be obviously moral in nature.

Recently, IFI executive director David E. Smith had this to say on the topic:

The Illinois pension problem and state budget issues that we’ve been writing about are moral issues that affect families, businesses and churches across the state. It is not among the main issues that we’ve addressed over our 25 years of ministry, but the irresponsible and reckless stewardship of tax resources that plagues our state should be a growing concern to Christian citizens of this state.

Jesus told His disciples, “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s” in Matthew 22:21. In the United States, “we the people” are Caesar. As such, “we the people” will be accountable for the poor stewardship of our resources and the high level of corruption we tolerate in government.

We are blessed by God with the gift of self-government.  It absolutely matters how we steward it.

Over the years I have collected and linked to articles on this page at my website: On the Connection Between the Economic and Social Issues. One of the articles was written by Jim DeMint, former member of Congress and president of the Heritage Foundation. In “The Connection Between Economic and Cultural Policies”, DeMint writes:

Inside the Beltway, federal policymakers tend to think in terms that separate “economic” policy from “social” policy. But life in homes and communities around the country doesn’t organize into such neat categories.

“Cultural decline,” DeMint wrote, “did not emerge entirely on its own”:

Perverse incentives created by public poli­cies have contributed to social breakdown. The law is a teacher, and decades of policies undermining families and communities have taught neighbors to depend on the government rather than each other, with dire consequences for the very people those policies were designed to help.

DeMint is correct. For over half a century, immoral government economic policies have caused havoc when it comes to the family structure and stability. For even longer, government policy on health care has left many families struggling to afford both health insurance and health care. One of the greatest threats to the family in this state continues to be the use and abuse of tax dollars.

As part of its work in defending faith, family and freedom, IFI and IFA must cover economic issues. Spending future generations into debt, after all, is a moral issue.

We urge you to pray for our state and nation, for our elected officials in Springfield and Washington D.C.  

PLEASE also consider a financial gift to IFI to sustain our work. We have stood firm for 25 years, working to boldly bring a biblical perspective to public policy.

The Illinois Family Institute always appreciates when its work is read by more people, and we benefit when others bring attention to our work. Over the years when writing op eds I’ve made mistakes — failed to correct typos or spelling, used the wrong word such as Medicaid when the word should have been Medicare, and cited something as fact that turned out not to be true. Corrections from readers are always welcome…

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about SB 31, legislation that had been amended and shortened, and I failed to catch the updated language.

When Matt Dietrich of Politifact and the Better Government Association sent me an email bringing that error to my attention, I expressed my appreciation to him and made the correction in the article. Days later, Dietrich posted this article about my error, and while he noted my correction, he concludes that what I had written was “FALSE.”

Yes, the words I used from the earlier version of the bill was an error. My calling SB 31 a sanctuary bill was not an error.

Here is some text from an earlier version of SB 31, the “Trust Act”:

Provides that absent a judicial warrant or probable cause of criminal activity, a government official shall not make arrests in the following State-funded facilities or their adjacent grounds: State-funded schools, including licensed day care centers, pre-schools, and other early learning programs; elementary and secondary schools, and institutions of higher education…

This is language from the amended SB 31, which is now state law:

Section 15. Prohibition on enforcing federal civil immigration laws.
(a) A law enforcement agency or law enforcement official
shall not detain or continue to detain any individual solely on the basis of any immigration detainer or non-judicial immigration warrant or otherwise comply with an immigration detainer or non-judicial immigration warrant.
(b) A law enforcement agency or law enforcement official
shall not stop, arrest, search, detain, or continue to detain a person solely based on an individual’s citizenship or immigration status.

The change is merely cosmetic. The original version said a judicial warrant or probable cause of criminal activity would be required for a government official to make an arrest in several enumerated state-funded facilities. In other words, a law enforcement official could not make an arrest based solely on immigration status.

The newer version says that a law enforcement official cannot make an arrest based solely on immigration status, presumably anywhere. Thus, the newer version includes and applies to the state-funded facilities enumerated in the original bill.

Removing the language only made the bill more palatable to establishment politicians and their Leftist allies.

It is not difficult to understand the long-running dream of Leftists to import more future Democratic Party voters from other countries. Some of their most loyal supporters will be those who broke federal law to come here and were then protected by the Democratic Party.

Leftists are talented when it comes to the strategic manipulation of language. Just as centuries-old mainline Christian doctrine is now referred to as “hate,” illegal aliens are referred to as “undocumented immigrants.” Tolerance now means intolerance. The “Affordable Care Act” made health insurance unaffordable for millions of Americans. The “Trust Act” means you can trust that we don’t care if you’re here illegally.

As “blue” as Illinois is, Democratic Party leaders and their supporters know that even here you must be careful with language. And if you alter SB 31 enough, you can even deny it’s a sanctuary bill. Some people are upset that the ruse didn’t work.

The news of Rauner’s signing of SB 31 was covered by both the political left and the right, and the headlines are similar:

The Daily Herald: Rauner to sign immigration bill making Illinois a sanctuary state

Think Progress: Republican governor signs bill to limit collaboration between police and ICE

Reboot Illinois: Rauner signs ‘sanctuary state’ bill into law

Lifezette: Republican Governor Hammered for Embracing State Sanctuary Policy

ABC News: Governor signs law limiting Illinois police on immigration

Fox Illinois Decatur, IL (WRSP): Sanctuary state bill now law

It is common for legislation to evolve. Changes are made not only for material reasons but also for cosmetic reasons. In the evolution of SB 31, the larger aim of the legislation remained constant: hinder state and local law enforcement from participation in enforcing immigration laws, which is the widely accepted definition of a sanctuary city or sanctuary state.

Here was the close of Dietrich’s article:

The Illinois Family Institute said public facilities including schools, colleges and day care centers “will be made into sanctuaries by Bruce Rauner signing SB 31.”

The original version of the bill prohibited police from making arrests in such facilities, but that language was struck from the version passed by the General Assembly. The new bill contains directives that the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police says merely puts into state statute what most departments already practice.

We rate this statement False.

Actually, it is true. The only thing that changed was how the law was worded. My using text from the earlier version of the bill was an unfortunate mistake. That mistake was corrected. Perhaps more people will now understand what constitutes a sanctuary state.

Additional information:

From the National Conference of State Legislatures:

What Is a Sanctuary Policy? While there is no legal definition for sanctuary policies, the term is applied to jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities, such as information about immigration status and limiting the length of immigration detainers. Click here to read more.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform:

Sanctuary Policies Across America

The Role of State and Local Enforcement in Immigration Matters and Reasons to Resist Sanctuary Policies — Read the issue brief.

Sanctuary Policy is Bad Public Policy — Read the fact sheet.

Sanctuary Cities: Obstructing Immigration Enforcement — Read the policy analysis.

Join us in Medinah, Illinois, to hear world renowned Christian apologist Ray Comfort. Space is limited, don’t miss this special one time event. Click HERE for more information.

Tickets are $10 each. Call 708-781-9328 or purchase tickets below.

Click HERE for flyer.

“If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (John 15:18-19).

In the wake of the Charlottesville melee, the mainstream press is citing the disreputable Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and its “hate” groups list ad nauseum with nary a peep about the repeated criticism of the SPLC as a bastion of anti-Christian bigotry.

The Illinois Family Institute (IFI) is included on the “hate” groups list alongside white supremacist and white separatist groups for no reason other than our biblical view of marriage as a sexually differentiated union and our biblical views of sexual morality—views that are shared by the Roman Catholic Church, many Protestant denominations, many non-denominational churches, Orthodox Judaism, 2,000 years of church history, and the Bible.

It’s not just IFI that finds the SPLC and its leaders unethical. The avaricious founder of the SPLC, Morris Dees, and the dishonest editor-in-chief of the “Intelligence Report” which is responsible for the corrupt “hate” groups list, Mark Potok, have come under sustained criticism from many people for many years. (Click here, here, and here  to read more.)

Several months ago, one such critic, Real Clear Politics writer Carl Cannon, wrote an exposé of the SPLC, to whom Cannon attributes blame for the anti-free-speech assault on political scientist Charles Murray at radical Middlebury College in Vermont.

Civil rights attorney Dees co-founded the lucrative non-profit SPLC in 1971, ostensibly to combat the racism endemic to the South, and on the way, he’s made a boatload of money that has enabled him to live the luxurious lifestyle to which he and his five serial wives had become accustomed. His clients? Well, they didn’t fare quite as well financially.

Cannon explains that when the Ku Klux Klan’s power waned and racism diminished, the SPLC had to find new ways “to frighten people into still donating.” He says that “Scaring the bejesus out of people requires new bogeymen, and lots of them.” Further, Cannon claims that “mainstream conservative groups” are among the bogeymen.

Cannon reports that the “most scathing assessments of Dees and his group have always come from the left” like “Stephen B. Bright, a Yale law professor and president of the Atlanta-based Southern Center for Human Rights,” who describes Dees as a “con man” and a “fraud.”

Even the far-Left magazine The Nation indicts Dees as “the archsalesman of hatemongering,” accusing him of stuffing “mailbags…with his fundraising letters, scaring dollars out of the pockets of trembling liberals aghast at his lurid depictions of a hate-sodden America in dire need of legal confrontation by the SPLC…. Dees and his hate-seekers scour the landscape for hate…it’s their staple.”

While useful idiots in the mainstream press disseminate the SPLC’s propaganda, thus smearing Christian organizations and lining the pockets of Dees, the FBI has stopped using the SPLC as a resource.

The SPLC has perfected the tactics espoused by homosexuals Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen who in 1989 wrote what they deemed a “gay manifesto for the 1990’s” titled After the Ball, in which they urged “progressives” to utilize the mainstream media in a campaign to eradicate conservative moral beliefs—what they call “homohatred”—or “silence” the expression of such beliefs in public:

[L]ink homohating bigotry with all sorts of attributes the bigot would be ashamed to possess and with social consequences he would find unpleasant and scary…. Gays must launch a large-scale campaign…to reach straights through mainstream media. We’re talking about propaganda…. Gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection…. Make victimizers look bad…. The public should be shown images of ranting homohaters whose associated traits and attitudes appall and anger Middle America. The images might include: Klansmen… Hysterical backwoods preachers… Menacing punks, thugs, and convicts who speak coolly about the “fags” they… would like to bash… [or] A tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed.

The SPLC employs all of these propagandistic tactics to stigmatize and marginalize Christian organizations like the Family Research Council, the American Family Association, Liberty Counsel, and the Illinois Family Institute for our beliefs about sexuality and marriage that derive from Scripture and for our willingness to express them publicly.

These are a few of the organizations that have not fallen prey to ravenous wolves or been taken “captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ” (Colossians 2:8).

For their faithfulness, Christ-followers will be hated, but enduring such trials brings blessings:

“Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” (Matthew 5:11-12).

The cost of discipleship has been minimal in America for over two hundred years, but the cost is rising due to the unholy efforts of “LGBTQQAP” activists.

While Jesus says, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me,” many Christians—entire denominations—are choosing instead friendship with the world, ignoring the words of James:

“Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore, whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.” (James 4:4).

Download the IFI App!

We now have an IFI mobile app that enables us to deliver great content based on the “Tracks” you choose, including timely legislative alerts, cultural commentaries, upcoming event notifications, links to our podcasts, video reports, and even daily Bible verses to encourage you. This great app is available for Android and iPhones.

Key Features:

• It’s FREE!
• Specific content for Christians
• Performs a spiritual assessment
• Sends you daily Scriptures to encourage and equip you
• You determine when and how much content you get