When the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago released its budget and tax hike blueprint several weeks ago, most mainstream media reporters and columnists never picked up on the fact that the group specifically recommended that the “tax swap” idea be dumped. I wrote about it, and the Southtown gave it a brief mention, but until John McCarron’s Tribune column during the holidays, none of the bigs had really broached the subject.

That muffled “thud” we civic wonks discerned a few weeks ago was neither a sonic boom nor rooftop landing of reindeer on a practice run.

It was another crash landing of the so-called “tax swap”–the complicated proposal for state fiscal reform that has been the centerpiece of the liberal-progressive agenda hereabouts for more than a decade.

Not that the swap is dead dead. Like Mr. Dumpty, it could be reassembled and offered once again this spring to the Illinois General Assembly. In fact, civic types already are busy with the glue. They are practiced at repair, having kept the swap idea alive since its initial tumble in 1997, when then-Senate President James “Pate” Philip shoved it off the wall.

The nudge this time came from the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago. These are the corporate chieftains who, nearly a century ago, commissioned Daniel Burnham’s seminal Plan of Chicago. More recently they led the charge to expand O’Hare International Airport. They have clout.

McCarron supposes that the federal tax deduction for property taxes provides an incentive to keep the property tax system in place. I think there is also a legit worry for families who move to areas with good, expensive schools that if the state takes over primary funding the government will screw up their kids’ futures.

Meanwhile, a big push for a big tax hike is coming soon to a General Assembly near you.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich has pledged not to raise the state income tax and won’t back down, his staff said.

But a new, bipartisan caucus of lawmakers wants to bolster state aid for per-student spending by more than $1 billion, and it is expected to include a state-tax hike in its education proposals.[…]

The [legislative] education caucus’ goals include reducing reliance on local taxes for schools. That system creates inequities because wealthy districts can afford to spend more on schools than poor districts.

The caucus also wants to increase state aid guaranteed per student to a level recommended by the Illinois Education Funding Advisory Board. Currently, that recommended figure is $6,405 per child, but the advisers plan to update that in 2007. This school year, the per-pupil amount is $5,334. It would take an estimated $1.6 billion to move to the $6,405 figure.

But Jim Edgar and Dawn Clark Netsch, among others, are skeptical that anything will happen this year.

“I’ll be awfully surprised if something happens,” said former Gov. Jim Edgar, who believes a tax hike is necessary because of the state’s financial problems. “The governor has said he is adamantly opposed to any tax increases. It’s awfully difficult to get a major tax increase when the governor indicates he is opposed to it.” […]

“You’re going to have a lot of legislators say, ‘Why should I stick my neck out on a tax increase if the governor is going to veto it?’” Netsch said. “He (Blagojevich) has the bully pulpit more than anyone else. He has got to be willing to be involved.”

Ralph Martire, who has made a career of pushing for a tax swap plan that nets the government lots more money, is more optimistic, first noting that Senate President Emil Jones is already in favor of providing more cash for schools, then adding…

“If (House Speaker Michael) Madigan becomes engaged, it will become a priority to the state,” Martire said.

And in that event, Martire said, even Blagojevich might be convinced to go along, no-tax-hike pledge or not, because education also is one of his top priorities.