A look ahead
Wednesday, May 28, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* House Speaker Madigan is probably correct. The November election will almost surely turn out to be a referendum on whether to keep the income tax rate at 5 percent or roll it back…
Speaker Michael Madigan acknowledged the budget proposal would leave unfinished business and vowed to spend the summer and fall working to get the income tax hike made permanent to provide more money to run state government. The approach also ensures the governor’s race will continue to be framed up by opposite positions on a tax hike Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn and Republican challenger Bruce Rauner have staked out.
“My expectation is that this issue will be taken into the general election and I think the governor will be supportive of an extension of the income tax increase through the general election,” Madigan said. “My expectation is that Mr. Rauner will be against. So you’ll have a clear line of division going into the election. And people can make their choice.”
Rauner will point to things like Senate President John Cullerton’s prediction that taxes will have to rise after the election and maybe even tell voters that there’s already a “secret plan” to do just that. Quinn will have to campaign on a platform of avoiding painful cuts by keeping taxes at 5 percent.
* For his part, Madigan is trying to remain coy…
Asked if he also believes a tax increase will be needed later in the budget year, Madigan said “not necessarily.”
“I plan to work into the summer on the budget and when we get into the fall and into January I’ll assess the situation at the time,” he said.
That gives cover to some of his more politically vulnerable members.
* I haven’t received anything official from Bruce Rauner’s campaign since last Friday, May 23rd, when he sent an e-mail blast to supporters…
This week, we made a series of phone calls to voters in key legislative districts encouraging voters to stand against the Quinn-Madigan tax hike.
Quinn pledged to the people of Illinois the tax hike would be temporary and now he’s breaking his word. But our calls worked. When we stand on principle we can beat the Quinn-Madigan machine.
* The next day, Rauner attended the annual Livingston County Republicans Lincoln-Reagan Dinner at the Elks Lodge in Pontiac…
“Our plan is to roll that income tax back – all the way back to 3 percent,” said Rauner. “He said he was going to have that income tax hike be temporary and now he’s flipped-flopped to make it permanent.”
* But Eric Zorn added his voice to those who are clamoring for some specific answers…
Oh, but the plans are coming, Rauner said, as the conversation began to wrap up. “We’ll have a pension plan, an education plan, a transportation plan.”
Pearson’s follow-up was on point: “How can anyone believe this after hearing it month after month after month?”
Well, they can believe it if Rauner stops playing the coy, condescending critic and becomes an active participant in this week’s negotiations.
Tell us: Where would a Gov. Bruce Rauner find the estimated necessary $4 billion in spending cuts, on a full-year basis, that will be needed if the tax hike expires, while also increasing support for education? What constitutional remedies do you have for the pension crisis?
- PublicServant - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 10:54 am:
I call Drinking Game for every mention of super majority!
- Adam Smith - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 10:57 am:
Nothing rankles the ego of reporters more than a pol who won’t dance to their tune.
Rauner would be foolish to produce detailed budget proposals until the session has ended and his team can analyze just what the state of play is.
In other words, how can he treat the patient until he can diagnose the extent of their illness?
- A guy... - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 10:58 am:
The more Eric Zorn asks, the more time you have to give an answer when you’re good and ready to. #hack.
- Cassandra - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:00 am:
Well, the Democrats in our one-party state did have the option of making their income tax increase permanent from the beginning. Then we wouldn’t be having this discussion–although some might say we’d be having a discussion about making the tax even higher. In any case, Quinn and the Dems decided to go the temporary route, so here we are. And honestly, in this blue, one-party state I still don’t believe the increase is in that much danger, at a minimum, of being “temporarily” extended again. But voter apathy is a problem in off-year elections, and the uncertainty could presumably increase voter turnout. And that’s what all the sky-is-falling rhetoric is really about-getting voters to the polls in November.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:01 am:
–The more Eric Zorn asks, the more time you have to give an answer when you’re good and ready to.–
Not sure what that statement means, but you know Rauner has no “plan.”
- Demoralized - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:03 am:
It would be nice if Rauner would tell us what magical voodoo he has up his sleeve.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:03 am:
“The more Bruce Rauner refuses to answer anything, the more time everyone will have to Hammer and Shake the false persona candidate Rauner, because both Rauners have nothing of substance to say. #Dope.”
Better
- PublicServant - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:04 am:
Adam Smith - So you’re saying you have to “Vote for the bill, err governor, to see what’s in it, err him.” Channel Nancy Pelosi much?
- Wallinger Dickus - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:17 am:
Here’s what Big Jim Thompson said. Twice, in fact (although the second time he was already the incumbent):
Oh my goodness. Now that we have had a chance to see the books up close, we now know things are much worse that we could have imagined. Gracious sakes alive.
But do not despair, good people. We will simply raise your taxes so we can keep Illinois safe and sound.
And Edgar did it too, right after he accused Dawn Netsch of trying to raise taxes.
The odor never changes, only the source.
- OneMan - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:17 am:
Ok, if you were the Rauner campaign (again with the goal of winning the election, because if you don’t do that this is all academic) would you reveal anything now? Before session ends?
How does that help you get elected?
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:20 am:
OneMan, the Rauner pledge is to raise education funding substantially while cutting taxes.
The reason he hasn’t released the “plan” for that has nothing to do with timing or the election. The reason it that it’s not possible.
- Calendar Girl - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:21 am:
Rauner has proven to be quibbler of the truth. Look into his dealing with that nursing home if you want to see what type of robber baron Rauner has become.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:26 am:
- OneMan -,
You make total sense, but…
Rauner has been running for 12 or more months, being the Peter Fitzgerald/Jason Plummer of his time in hiding, and while “Hammering and Shaking” at events, or cornered by the Press after, at some point, even Rauner’s beloved Tribune, who gives its Op-Ed page at a given moment, … at some point, running that long, “Hammering and Shaking” has to lead to some substance.
Rich hasn’t heard “Boo” in a 5 days; nothing. The website still hasn’t moved the discussion any farther, leaving the Press and others asking, “What the heck do you think?”
There is a strategic aspect, then there is a blatant shutting out of the Press and voters as to what Rauner’s Crew wants as ANY platform on anything of substance.
- Federalist - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:26 am:
Th gist of this seems to be that if Quinn is elected, then the public has ‘voted’ for a permanent tax increase.
Not certain it is that clear cut. There are other issues out there that could make one vote for one candidate over another that are not directly related to the tax increase. And, of course, the individual candidates and district (local) issues also play a role.
If all candidates running for the GA come out with a definitive position on the tax increase and then those who are elected vote as they said they would then this would be more of a mandate one way or another. Complicated if Rauner would win.
To me it appears, the Madigan wants the tax increase to be permanent and strongly feels the DEMS will have a majority in the GA and that Quinn will win. Hence the voters have approved a tax increase.
Nice spin, Mr. Madigan but it is very complicated issue.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:27 am:
This is a reelection campaign.
So it is the incumbent’s job to tell us why he should be reelected.
It is the challenger’s job to point out where the incumbent is failing or has failed.
It is that simple for Rauner to win.
So demanding details from the challenger is besides the point. Doing so, only feeds ammunition to the incumbent floundering in his reelection bid. The challenger needs to prevent the election to be about him. It is the incumbent’s job to demonstrate an ability to do their elected job well enough to get elected.
So anyone demanding details regarding Rauner, needs to balance those demands demanding that Quinn show gubernatorial successes. Anytime Quinn and his team of trained liars try to make Rauner the issue of the campaign, a good reporter should return the conversation to how good a governor Quinn is, and has been. It is the job of Rauner and his team of trained liars to be the alternative to Quinn.
Quinn got a break in 2010 when he had yet to prove he could not be governor. After Blagojevich, voters were tired enough to give him a second chance.
This election is about how well Quinn has done with that second chance. It is his reelection. It is about Pat Quinn. That is why Rauner hasn’t been giving anyone details about what he theoretically will do if he should be elected.
We got concrete results on Quinn. This election is about those facts, not the theoretical suppositions of Mr. Rauner.
- PoolGuy - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:28 am:
Rauner wants to take Illinois back to 3%. but at 3% Illinois: 1) ran huge deficits, 2) had billions in unpaid bills, 3) were not making our pension payments, 4) were borrowing heavily, 5) not increasing education funding like he wants.
there’s a 5-point plan for you Bruce. good luck.
- steve schnorf - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:29 am:
WD, since you seem quite the expert, when did Edgar propose raising our taxes, and how?
- Anonymous - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:32 am:
Public servant,
Seems like Madigan is now in campaign mode also refusing to be straight forward with answers about taxes and budgets
“Asked if he also believes a tax increase will be needed later in the budget year, Madigan said “not necessarily.”
“I plan to work into the summer on the budget and when we get into the fall and into January I’ll assess the situation at the time,” he said”
- A guy... - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:38 am:
Yeah Willie, Bruce Rauner is being the Jason Plummer of his time. Brilliant comment. Redefines dense.
- A guy... - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:39 am:
=== steve schnorf - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:29 am:
WD, since you seem quite the expert, when did Edgar propose raising our taxes, and how?====
Mr. Schnorf, you do mean to exclude “fees” in this discussion and limit it to “taxes”, correct?
- RNUG - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:48 am:
Since no one else has answered the pension question, I’ll make myself a target
Rauner doesn’t have a lot of room to maneuver…
A good number of the constitutional alternatives for “pension reform” were already implemented in the “Tier 2″ approach. The State could do more of that, further altering pensions for new hires and / or offering some alternatives such as the much touted “401K” approach. Won’t save a lot of up front money.
If you want to constitutionally change things for existing workers, then the State needs to offer a true, non-coercive choice between “new plan A”, “new plan B” and “keep what you have”. This type of approach most likely won’t save significant dollars either because the State will have to offer something pretty decent to get employees to switch from the current “defined benefit” approach.
A “cost shift” for teachers, community colleges, and other organizations funded (at least partially) by property taxes is a legal possibility. The biggest problem there is the likelihood the State will just end up re-labeling most or all the money as new “school spending” while still doling out the same amount to the districts, which have to turn around and put it in the pension systems so there is no true expanded school funding … but it would let Rauner CLAIM school funding was expanded. Maybe that is Rauner’s plan …
t won’t really save any money; you would still have the local school districts having to raise property taxes just to keep up with the annual expense increases due to inflation. The one thing Rauner could do is eliminate all the unfunded school mandates; I don’t have a clue what that action would save.
Another possibility would be for Rauner to claw back any and all revenue sharing, keeping all the funds at the State budget level. Don’t imagine that would go over very well since it would force local units to raise taxes.
How much of the above do I expect to see Rauner, if elected, manage to get through the GA and actually implement? Pretty much none of it …
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:49 am:
===Yeah Willie, Bruce Rauner is being the Jason Plummer of his time. Brilliant comment. Redefines dense.===
lol, At least you know both Rauners are the Peter Fitzgerald, running on “anything but…” and hiding.
I made a mistake; “Slip and Sue” Sanguinetti is the Jason Plummer of her time…apologies!
- foster brooks - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:50 am:
Rauner will just short the pensions like Gov Christy did. If asfme doesn’t play ball with him he’ll keep shorting the pensions.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 12:00 pm:
== If asfme doesn’t play ball with him he’ll keep shorting the pensions.==
It’s been discussed before that their deal is up next year, so this statement may not be far off
- Chris - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 12:04 pm:
“when did Edgar propose raising our taxes, and how?”
The pension ramp was a tax increase. It was a *deferred* tax increase, certainly, but it was, nonetheless, a tax increase.
- Chris - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 12:20 pm:
“== If asfme doesn’t play ball with him he’ll keep shorting the pensions.==
It’s been discussed before that their deal is up next year, so this statement may not be far off”
He may be *considering* a “Reagan ATC” style mass firing. Let the contract expire, fire everyone, let them re-apply for their jobs–which would then be under Tier 2 pensions. Plenty of people out of work who would be happy to apply to fill the slots.
“ANARCHY!!” you say? Isn’t that what you expect from Brucey? And he’d (theoretically) get two birds, one stone–reduced annual expenses and reduced pension deficit. “LAWSUITS!!” you say? What makes you think that that scares Brucey?
*IF* that is part of his plan, that would be a truly unspeakable ‘plan’.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 12:49 pm:
–He may be *considering* a “Reagan ATC” style mass firing. –
PATCO was barred by federal law from going on strike. Reagan, under Taft-Hartley, ordered them back to work. Those who failed to comply with the law were fired for cause.
AFSCME has the right to strike in Illinois. Members cannot be fired for doing so.
- Precinct Captain - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 12:52 pm:
==In other words, how can he treat the patient until he can diagnose the extent of their illness?==
The guy has been running for over a year. If he doesn’t know the state of play than he’s an idiot.
==So demanding details from the challenger is besides the point.==
If it’s so besides the point why does Rauner keep promising details?
==So anyone demanding details regarding Rauner, needs to balance those demands demanding that Quinn show gubernatorial successes.==
Fracking, gay marriage, managed care, large capital program, a stable footing for the state’s finances.
- A. Nonymous - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 12:59 pm:
Like him or not, Quinn had the stones to put a plan out in public and put it up for a vote.
Rauner is showing a distinct lack of intestinal fortitude.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 1:01 pm:
==Quinn had the stones ==
You call them stones, others view them more as rocks. In his head.
- votecounter - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 1:09 pm:
I’m not a big Rauner guy but how can you demand what he would do differently from the Dem’s if they haven’t put their budget out yet? Since Madigan has been at the helm we have had nothing but smoke and mirrors when it comes to budgets and they now demand Rauner release his plan before Madigan does? How much of the “cuts” Zorn talks about are baseline? A cut from the projected increase? Freeze spending and limit manditory increases to inflation and cut the corporate and individual tax rate to pre tax increase levels (lower in the corp tax case) to 4% lower gas prices and get rid of the Illinois different blends of gas and get out of the way.
- Bill White - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 1:17 pm:
When revenue is the equivalent of a queen size sheet and projected expenditures are at least the size of a king size bed, someone will left out in the cold.
Democrats have called at least two plans for a vote:
1. Raise the income tax
2. Doomsday budget with severe cuts
Both failed.
Where is the IL GOP plan?
- Formerpol - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 1:25 pm:
How in the world can the state afford to build Illiana Expressway, if we are broke? Could save billions right there!
- George - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 1:47 pm:
Mr. Schnorf, I believe Edgar campaigned in 1990 for higher rates when he went up against hartigan. And of course he later made it permanently higher at 3% following the brief return to 2.5%.
- Annie - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 1:50 pm:
Clearly, Brucie will be aided by the Weenie Caucus, those brave GOP legislators who so capably dodge tough budget votes, point fingers and leave the heavy lifting to others.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 1:58 pm:
Maybe it is Rich’s post regarding Reagan.
Maybe I am just old.
But I can’t help thinking about Walter Mondale and Richard Nixon.
Remember when Mondale kicked his campaign off with this one:
“Mr. Reagan will raise taxes; and so will I. He won’t tell you. I just did.”
How about Richard Nixon’s vague promise on Vietnam?
“New leadership will end the war.”
Well, we know what happened. Nixon won. Mondale lost.
I give Quinn credit for moxie. I would give him more credit if he had actually implemented a plan three years ago to convince the public to make the temporary tax increase permanent.
And to be fair, it isn’t just Zorn who is looking for answers: it is Tribune editorial Board, SJ-R, Crain’s….by June 30th it will be many more.
In fact, in the coming days every reporter will come to Rauner looking for his feedback on a passed budget: would he sign or veto…what does he like, or not?
But truthfully, Rauner can keep skating on vagueness until he cannot any more, and I would bet his team will do everything it can to wait to release a plan until Labor Day.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool….
- Mighty M. Mouse - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 2:03 pm:
===Anytime Quinn and his team of trained liars try to make Rauner the issue of the campaign, a good reporter should return the conversation to how good a governor Quinn is, and has been. It is the job of Rauner and his team of trained liars to be the alternative to Quinn.===
What’s even MORE effective is when you can paint your opponent as a monster of real life and ALSO be telling the truth, if it is possible to do so.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 2:05 pm:
==Better to remain silent and be thought a fool….==
…than be Pat Quinn and remove all doubt.
Since everyone is demanding right now a detailed plan from Rauner for a budget to be put in place a year from now, I expect the same details be set out by Quinn. A lot of details for this years budget, but nothing detailed that has a shot at being implemented for the next year
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 2:07 pm:
=== A lot of details for this years budget, but nothing detailed that has a shot at being implemented for the next year ===
LOL
Are you saying you want him to propose a Fiscal Year 2016 budget plan?
- Mighty M. Mouse - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 2:13 pm:
===I give Quinn credit for moxie. I would give him more credit if he had actually implemented a plan three years ago to convince the public to make the temporary tax increase permanent.===
Quinn tried as hard as he could then just like he tried as hard as he could now. He was unsuccessful then for the exact same reason that he was been unsuccessful now. He tried but he is and was just governor, not dictator, of Illinois.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 2:14 pm:
===just like he tried as hard as he could now===
It’s not good enough.
But now he’ll get the opportunity to show what real life cuts will mean. He shoulda been talking this up for years.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 2:20 pm:
Only one of these guys is actually the governor, you know. Demanding that the guy who is not the governor provide details concerning a state budget is too silly to be given a second thought.
Rauner’s vagueness of details on a subject he has no ability to have studied, nor access to, is more accurate a response than if he actually did unveil a plan.
Sorry Quinn fans, but we have only one governor and he is the one this election is about. Quinn’s failure is what we’re voting on. Is it bad enough to remove him from office and let this other guy get a crack at it?
Rauner doesn’t have the job - Quinn does. We know Pat can’t do the job. Telling everyone that Bruce can’t is speculation.
- Mighty M. Mouse - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 2:23 pm:
===It’s not good enough…He shoulda been talking this up for years.===
I don’t like to admit it but I suspect that you’re probably right.
- Wallinger Dickus - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 2:24 pm:
Mr Schnorf, in answer to your question about Governor Edgar’s income tax increase proposal, I quote this from Taxpayers United of America, April 2010:
“in 1996 he (Edgar) endorsed this income tax-hike proposal, which was approved by the state House. Fortunately, the state income tax increase was killed in the State Revenue Committee on May 30, 1997.”
We could parse but let’s just admit that Netsch was probably correct.
- Weenie Caucus - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 2:34 pm:
@VanillaMan
” Demanding that the guy who is not the governor provide details concerning a state budget is too silly to be given a second thought.”
An apt comment. Welcome to the Weenie Caucus, where you merely observe and throw rocks — even if you are running for public office.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 2:37 pm:
–Rauner’s vagueness of details on a subject he has no ability to have studied, nor access to, is more accurate a response than if he actually did unveil a plan.–
What in the world are you talking about? Are you saying that he’s an idiot? All the information is easily accessible.
He says he will have a detailed plan. Why do you think he is incapable of that?
- Demoralized - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 3:13 pm:
==Demanding that the guy who is not the governor provide details concerning a state budget is too silly to be given a second thought.==
Actually I’m asking the guy who wants to be governor what he would do. I don’t think that’s all that silly. You’re the silly one.
- Cassandra - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 3:24 pm:
Rauner, win or lose, won’t be the only political candidate who believed that the electorate was just crying out for change and renewal and then found out, before or after the election, that it wasn’t quite that simple. But he still has the summer to put together some position papers since the electorate is about to tune out for a few months.He will have to base those papers on more than cancelling the income tax increase though. Especially since, if he wins, he’ll have to extend the increase, at least temporarily, to avoid budget chaos. And anyway we’re already paying it. It won’t be regular taxpayers who will be driven to the polls by the fear of having the tax continued. It’ll be those who fear it won’t–and, like it or not, in the modern Illinois state, there are many of the latter.
- Walker - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 3:53 pm:
Adam Smith and A Guy: I find it hard to believe you actually think Rauner will come up with these substantive plans before election day. Good luck with that.
VMan has it right — he wins by not doing so, no matter what the pundits, highly-informed voters, and reporters expect.
If I’m wrong, I will apologize.
- Skeptic - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 3:59 pm:
“Demanding that the guy who is not the governor provide details concerning a state budget is too silly to be given a second thought.” By that standard, you and I are equally qualified to be governor as Rauner. Which of course is why we should both vote for Oswego Willie.
- facts are stubborn things - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 4:06 pm:
Its all politics….MJM/many members feel the best way to keep a majority/stay in office is to put off the issue of tax increase and or a doomsday budget until after the election. Perhaps the election will be a referendam on taxes?
- Anonymous - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 4:57 pm:
==LOL
Are you saying you want him to propose a Fiscal Year 2016 budget plan?==
Well isn’t that what you’re demanding from Rauner, since that is the first budget he would have any say over?
- votecounter - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 5:28 pm:
Skeptic
It’s obvious you have never spent any time talking to the Governor. If you did you would find that you are correct! That anyone is equally as qualified as Pat Quinn is to be Governor Blago was a poindexter next to this guy. I know him from radio and he was introduced as Political Gadfly Pat Quinn. Nobody ever thought he would be elected to a job with any responsability or get elected to anything.That doesn’t say alot for the GOP does it?
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 7:21 pm:
Anonymous:
If elected, Rauner would have to manage the FY 15 budget for six months. It is not unrealistic for people to ask him what he thinks that budget should look like.
Let’s stop with the snake oil.
Rauner is dodging the question. It is a perfectly legitimate question.
Dodging it for as long as possible is also a perfectly legitimate political strategy with a long tradition.
But, in dodging the question, Rauner is acting exactly like the type of “slick politician” he claims to be the antidote for.
Mind you, that does not mean the strategy will not work.
As I have said since the onset, this election hinges on two things: 1) the economic outlook, which neither candidate has any control over, and 2) Governor Quinn’s ability to switch this from a referendum on him to a choice between the two candidates, which Rauner has no control over.
Quinn probably needs some moderate improvement in voter’s economic outlook combined with a successful effort to convince Democrats in particular that this election is a choice between Quinn and Lex Luthor. Note: Luthor was elected President capitalizing on the misfortunes of the prior administration that - wait for it - Luthor himself actually helped create.
Art. Life.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 7:34 pm:
=== Which of course is why we should both vote for Oswego Willie.===
- Skeptic -, the momentum is building(?). Time will tell.
To the Post,
===The November election will almost surely turn out to be a referendum on whether to keep the income tax rate at 5 percent or roll it back…===
Speaker is probably right, indeed, but if Rauner is like me and others far smarter than me who think the gradual reduction is probably best, it might be in Rauner’s best interest to say so, again, and give the “cover” needed …
Of course, all those calls into those House and Senate districts box Rauner’s Crew in, instead of having ONE plan, rolling out “cover”, look Gubernatorial, and then “box” Quinn in.
Nope.
Great example of the Two Rauners; one pandering, one, the insider, understanding the game, and why the gradual reduction is the best policy and politics, and the best option to inherit.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 10:47 pm:
Willy:
Sage advice, but the Tea Party types can turn on you in a hot minute. They realize too that since they are a super-minority, they have no constructive role in lawmaking, so they actually enjoy spoiling elections. It is one of their few powers.
If Rauner goes too soft too soon on taxes, how does he ensure conservatives come to the dance? Oberweis will be down ten points. Rauner is pro-choice and the Second amendment folks aren’t fans.
It sounds like he thinks he can appease the Tea Partiers by calling for a ramp down of the tax extension but taking that ramp back down to 3 percent instead of 3.75%.
He is probably right.
It does not change the arithmetic, but it buys him plenty of time.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 28, 14 @ 11:45 pm:
===It sounds like he thinks he can appease the Tea Partiers by calling for a ramp down of the tax extension but taking that ramp back down to 3 percent instead of 3.75%.
He is probably right.
It does not change the arithmetic, but it buys him plenty of time.===
Agreed. Which is why the same Dopey answers will be given to the question, “Mr. Rauner, what is your plan?”
Well done. Doesn’t help in solving problems, but you are On It - YDD -.