http://www.joincross.com/default2.asp
Jobs: Promoting the “Destination: Illinois Jobs program which aims at bringing jobs back to Illinois in the following ways:
Education:
From a flyer I got in the mail. Paid for by Citizens to Elect Tom Cross.
Tom Cross. A State Representative… Working For Us
Tom Cross. A Republican Leader… We Trust
From a flyer I got in the mail. Paid for by Citizens to Elect Tom Cross.
Tom Cross. Our State Representitive. LEADERSHIP. ACTION. RESULTS.
LEADERSHIP for Illinois
House Republican Leader Tom Cross is working to put Illinois back on the right track. Tom has opposed Governor Blagojevich's plan to raid public pensions of over $3.5 billion. Tom also is leading the effort to hold the line on taxes, spending and borrowing.
ACTION for our Community
As our State Representative, Tom Cross is working hard to prepare our community for the future. Securing additional state funding for our local schools, delivereing ove r$90 million in federal and state funds for the widening of I-55, Rt. 59 and Rt. 71. Tom Cross is making our communities ready for tomorrow.
RESULTS for our Families
State Representative Tom Cross is making a difference for our families. He fought to reform Illinois' medical liability system, to keep ob/gyns and neurosurgeons in our hospitals. He's working to secure state funds for local schools to reduce class sizes and hire more teachers and he's meeting with local officials to find ways to control growth while improving our local roads and building new schools.
Q. What issues would you like to see addressed during the spring session?
I think we need to work on a school construction bond program. It’s something we needed to do last fall. I’ve been working on, just myself, some obesity and nutrition issues, from vending machines and exercise in schools, P.E. classes, soft drink machines.
I think we need to continue to look at how we’re going to fund education. And we need to look at a capital bill, separate from the school construction, a capital bill including roads. And I might have some ideas — I’m not going to elaborate now — but some more stuff involving the death penalty.
I just think there’s a brand new General Assembly that wants to keep an eye on it. And to keep, just for me, a focus on keeping the budget in line and keeping spending down.
Q. You mentioned education funding. As a suburban lawmaker, do you have any specific concerns regarding school funding reform?
You’ve got to make sure you have ongoing property tax relief. Two, you need to make sure whatever funding stream we find, the formula’s not altered to the detriment of the suburbs. It all boils down to an equity issue and balance between the suburbs and the rest of the state. It’s important to keep that balance.
Q. What about medical malpractice? As you see it, is capping plaintiff awards for pain and suffering the only solution?
I don’t know that it’s the only solution. It’s certainly worked in other areas. Unfortunately, all we’ve done is talk about it and we’ve done nothing. I think this last election, if nothing else, proved that it’s something that needs to be addressed. Some of the Democrats lost their races because of medical malpractice reform, or the lack of. So clearly it’s something we need to address. It’s going to continue to be an access to health care or lack of access to health care issue, and it’s going to be a problem that just grows every day.
Q. You mentioned the election. You picked up one seat in the House.
Well, we knocked off two. Yeah, we knocked off [William] Grunloh and [Ricca] Slone, but we had a little problem over in Cicero. We’re not sure what happened there still. But [for the Democrats] to lose those two downstate seats and for us to win those was big.
Q. You gained a net advantage of one vote. Practically speaking, what does that mean for you?
From a Republican Party standpoint, to win a couple seats is a positive. And we’re helping toward our rebuilding because I think our party can rebuild off of these caucuses. But from a practical standpoint, it’s not that significant in how we operate day-to-day in the General Assembly.
Q. Some of those contests, Elizabeth Coulson’s race comes to mind, saw some nasty ads. Does that make it harder to recruit candidates?
I think poor Beth was just in an awful race. It was so nasty. But I think people who have an interest in public service and are willing to work hard and are in the right district will find a way to win. I found that even Beth, who got beat up so bad, because she worked hard it just kind of rolled off her back.
Aaron Schock got beat up and so did David Reis, but because they worked hard — they were committed to wanting to serve the public — they prevailed.
So, yeah, I think in general it’s tougher to find people to run. But there are also people who are concerned about the direction of the state and that we’re losing jobs and we’re not taking care of access to health care issues and we’re not, maybe, taking care of education issues that they’re willing to run because they’re just committed to making a difference.
Q. What do you see as your role in rebuilding the Republican Party?
I think you can use our caucus as a starting point, along with the Senate caucus. We’ve had some successes. We have tried to reach out to young people in the state, get young people to run for legislative seats. We’ve tried to reach out to young people in terms of utilizing the Internet. What we’ve tried to focus on in our caucus is that there are issues that bring us together as opposed to divide us.
And we realize we have a diverse caucus. We have upstate and downstate. We have conservative and moderate. We have men and women. We have young and old.
Are there issues out there that we all fight about? Yeah. But we also know at the end of the day that it’s about jobs, it’s about malpractice reform, it’s about education, it’s about transportation. And if we can find those issues that unite and not divide, we can have success as a party. And that’s what I’m trying to do.
Q. You mentioned the Internet. Can you talk about your Web site, your blog? Where does that come from and what’s the goal, to build support with younger voters?
Yeah, of course it is. There’s a younger generation out there that gets their news and information about everything, not just politics, off the Internet, not watching Dan Rather or whomever. And so we think that’s the way to attract people, and we’ve had a lot of successes. People are reading our Web site and participating in the blog and that’s kind of neat.
It’s just a different way to communicate. Some people read Cosmopolitan. Some people read Glamour. Some people look at the Internet.
Q. Are Republicans losing their grip on the suburbs? Some say more suburbanites are voting Democratic. And [U.S. Rep.] Phil Crane, a GOP stalwart, was defeated by a Democrat. Is that a concern?
Is that a concern? Sure. Does it mean we’ve lost the suburbs? No. It means where we used to be able to take things somewhat for granted — and I don’t even know that we took it for granted, I think that it was just a little easier to count on a Republican vote — I think we have our work cut out for us.
I think we have diversity in the suburbs that we didn’t have 20 years ago, or even 10 years ago. You’ve got more single moms in the suburbs. You’ve got more ethnic groups in the suburbs. You’ve got Chicago folks in the suburbs. You’ve got women working in the suburbs, where 10 or 20, 30 years ago they didn’t. It’s just a different universe and we have to adapt, strategywise on attracting those people.
The suburbs are an attractive place to live. It’s where jobs are, schools are good and transportation is generally good. We just have to realize that as we work on our message.
I don’t think Phil Crane was about whether or not the suburbs are Republican or not. I think you’re talking about a guy who was [in office], what, 35 years. I like Phil Crane — it’s a lesson for all of us. You’ve got to know when to hang up your spikes. And I say that for members of the General Assembly, as well, not just the U.S. Congress. He, unfortunately, had someone hang up his spikes for him, as opposed to hanging them up himself. And I stress, that’s not a criticism of him. It’s just [that] we all have a point when we need to know to hang it up.
Q. You’re often described as a friend of Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Was that more so when he was in the House? How would you describe your relationship now?
Look, we’re not social friends. We got along. We were friends in the House. He went off and did his thing in Congress and became governor and I stayed here and became the House Republican leader. We work together when we can and I think that’s good. If the governor, tomorrow, was Lou Lang, I’d want to try to work with Lou Lang — when I could. There are times we can. There are times we just simply [can’t].
I mean, last year’s budget, we had some philosophical differences, and we’re going to continue to have philosophical differences when you’re from different parties and have different roles. I think we both recognize that we have to represent the people that we do, whether it’s all the people of the state of Illinois or a caucus. We have to do our jobs. I certainly have a healthy respect for his position, and I trust he has one for mine.
Q. You mentioned the budget. What do you make of the coalition you formed last year with Speaker Madigan and Senate Republican Leader Watson? Does it have staying power, and is it relegated to the budget?
It is hard to tell. I want to be committed to doing what’s best for our caucus and our members and the people of the state of Illinois. Again, I want to focus on streamlining government. We cut the budget last year across the board at 4 percent for most agencies. I think that was good. I want to focus on education and the other things I’ve talked about. So, coalition or not, those are going to be my goals and what’s best, again, for our caucus.
I do think, at the end of the day, the budget last year was a good product, for whatever reasons. So, I’d like to get to that point again this year.
Q. In the Senate, during the last two years, we’ve seen public partisan battles. We don’t see that in the House. Do you attribute that to a different environment in the House or what that might say about your ability to work with the other party?
We all have different styles and I can be very partisan and very vocal. It’s not my style. I can be if I have to be. But I think we have a responsibility to do the business of the people and there are times that the speaker and I are going to disagree and I respect that and I think he respects when I have to. I think, for me, what kind of drives me, is you always have to remember that you have to attack an issue and not a person. I don’t think the speaker or I make it personal. It’s all about issues.
Q. What are your thoughts on city ownership of a casino license?
Well, I think that, as a Republican, you certainly worry about any type of city ownership and the building of more patronage workers. I have some concerns about that. I guess anytime you can just build up a bigger workforce, I don’t like that. So I guess I have some concerns about that.
But there are so many concerns about the casinos at this point. Do we really need to be expanding gaming in this state to the extent that people are talking about? Do we really need one in the south suburbs? Do we really need one in the north suburbs? Do we really need one downstate? So all those questions are just as important. How are we going to utilize the money? Are we going to put it toward education? Are we going put it to tax reduction, a capital bill? There are so many unanswered questions that we really haven’t even gotten to the ownership issues yet.
Q. What about the budget? How much progress have we made toward erasing the $5 billion deficit of two years ago?
We’re getting closer and it’s hard to tell at this point. We’re going to have to wait and see what our revenues are as they come in in early spring. I think last year, at the end of the day, we ended up with a pretty decent product by cutting and not spending as much as had been initially suggested. So, we’re moving in the right direction, but we clearly have to be careful what we spend around here.
Q. During the fall legislative campaigns the fact that Chicago Democrats control both chambers and the Executive Mansion was portrayed as though it shortchanges the rest of the state. Do you see it that way?
It doesn’t have to. But, for instance, roads — you don’t want all the money to be spent on Chicago roads at the expense of suburbia or downstate. You don’t want the city to take care of the CTA at the expense of Metra or Pace. You don’t want Chicago State to get money at the expense of the other universities. So, when you start going down those roads, then you have some problems.
Q. Do you have a firm position on mass transit funding for the Chicago area? Some would like to revisit the funding formula to give the CTA a bigger cut.
I think you start messing with the formula and I think you’re going to have some problems. One of the things that concern me is traffic in Chicago, getting into the city. So many people have to do it for jobs. Whether you’re on the Stevenson or the Kennedy or the Eisenhower, traffic times have almost doubled — and to do anything to hurt Metra … . And I understand, there’s Cook and there’s the city and the collar counties, but I just don’t think you want to start to get into the business of trying to hurt Metra, because if you hurt Metra you potentially add more travel time for people and that’s not what we need as a society. We need to get people to and from work as efficiently and quickly as we can, and our expressways are at capacity and then some. We ought to be doing everything we can to make Metra, the CTA and Pace better.
Q. Does that mean more money from the state?
Look, maybe the CTA needs to look at cuts. The state cut our budget 4 percent across the board last year because we didn’t have money. Maybe the CTA ought to look at cuts. There’s nothing wrong with cuts. So many people are talking about spending. So many people are talking about more money. How about a little fiscal responsibility here?
Q. How much of a problem is pension funding for this state and to what extent does it inhibit what you can do with the rest of the budget?
I think it’s becoming our major burden on the state’s long-term and short-term financial obligations. We’re paying for some of the approaches of many years ago, before I was here, of putting things off, and we’ve got to catch up to it. It is a problem. We’re going to have to look to the CTA for some money, for a bailout — just a joke.
From: http://illinoisissues.uis.edu/features/2005jan/cross.html
Abortion Issues
Gun Issues
“Tom Cross, a fairly moderate Republican from Oswego, is a staunch supporter of embryonic stem cell research.”
From: http://illinoisissues.uis.edu/state/unite.html