48 Comments - One of the 35 - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 10:59 am: “If you raise taxes before you get other expenditures under control, you will never get them under control,” said Edgar. We should take it from someone who has been there and heed these words. Edgar was critisized as “Governor No” but he did what had to be done iunder the circumstances he inherited. The cuts have to come first. - Anonymous709 - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 11:04 am: All I can say is Blago truly was tried by a jury of his peers in the Senate last week… Blago was corrupt by just a few more decimal points than most of the members the “august” body that heard his defense…money must be taken out of campaigns or term limits should be enacted…the only rhetoric that rang true before the vote was taken was from the most recently elected who were surprisingly frank and somewhat taken aback by “business as usual” they have seen first hand since being elected…the rest was fluffy rhetoric indeed… - Bill Baar - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 11:09 am: Madigan wouldn’t even be in the same room with Rod Blagojevich and hadn’t returned Blagojevich’s calls in years. That’s a curious comment. It takes the burdon off the ex Guv and puts it on Madigan. Who was refusing to be the team player here? What prevented the rest of the constitutionally elected leaders to meet before in a show of unity for accomplishing the State’s business? They depended on the Guv to convene them? It seems like they could have done a few things before it came to this. - wordslinger - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 11:09 am: My guess is a temporary surcharge to pay off bills, zero real dollar growth in areas not subject to personnel contracts, federal match and statutory formula, “hiring freeze” and a gasoline tax for capital projects and to leverage federal funds. Anything extra for pensions? I doubt it. Too big a problem to handle in a recession. Once again, “manana.” A temporary surcharge might not sting too much depending on the tax breaks from the feds. Also, I think you can sell it as necessary because of Blago mismanagement and the moral imperative of paying bills for already contracted services. Perception will be so important to sell anything; the overall dollars are unimportant. Keep the state planes on the ground, ditch the SUV caravans, suspend seminar travel, etc. Also, make lots of announcements of big and small cuts in the Blago Imperial Governor’s Office. - Rich Miller - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 11:12 am: ===It takes the burdon off the ex Guv and puts it on Madigan. Who was refusing to be the team player here?=== Only if you believe that MJM should’ve been meeting with someone he believed to be a flat-out liar and a possible criminal. - John Bambenek - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 11:14 am: If we’re hungover on Rod, I must have missed the drunken party… - Bill Baar - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 11:18 am: Only if you believe that MJM should’ve been meeting with someone he believed to be a flat-out liar and a possible criminal. Ok, link this thought on the Pat Quinn honeymoon post then. How much of a pass should we give Quinn on Statements in support of a known criminal? - Bill - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 11:23 am: ==Only if you believe that MJM should’ve been meeting with someone he believed to be a flat-out liar and a possible criminal.== If he wasn’t going to meet with him for those reasons he probably should not have co-chaired his re-election campaign. - Cassandra - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 11:25 am: Good luck with the change to a more progressive tax rate, however appealing it may sound to us regular middle class folks Even Obama seems to have backed off of the idea, at least temporarily, despite having advocated strongly for a higher tax burden on the wealthy during his campaign. And the wealthy weren’t even complaining all that much–huge numbers of very wealthy people supported Obama. Not to mention that they are likely going to extend the fix to the AMT again…a way of protecting the fairly well off from higher taxes. Also, we know that we are paying a huge corruption tax in pay-to-play Illinois, and although the governor has changed, the laws haven’t changed much, meaning the pay to play folks are gearing up for the federal cash tsunami. And that proposed federal cash tsunami is going to be about 210.33 per capita in the “aid to states” caregory alone in Illinois, according to a chart in today’s WSJ. It hasn’t passed yet but the numbers are likely close. 2.7 billion. Why does Illinois state government need more aid from its struggling taxpayers. Obama seems to get it but here in Illinois the greed of our state and local pols is endless. - Phineas J. Whoopee - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 11:31 am: I can’t see how we can raise state taxes when the federal government is reducing taxes to stimulate the economy. It seems counter productive. How about real program cuts and effeciencies followed by good accounting pricipals, possible fee inceases and then begging Obama to bail us out with federal money. - Capitol View - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 11:32 am: Didn’t I read that Quinn respects Altgelt as one of our best governors? That’s a clear indication that he is willing to take political risks to do what is right. I agree with Wordslinger above - a temporary tax now to pay old bills and get our bond rating up, and go for an amendment to the state consitution changing our flat income tax to a graduated one. And set the rates based on what a slimmed down state government should be providing. What to slim down? Most of our regulations. Let the state certify that someone has achieved the credentials to join a profession, but let the profession govern itself in terms of disbarment, with notice back to the state when that action happens. Let the health and human services providers rely on professional accreditation within their trade industries, and drop all the paperwork other than what is required for processing reimbursements. In the prisons, hire more line staff and drop overtime. (The new maxi-maxi prison had staff ready to work there, until it was noticed that at least one building had it roof collapsing. Those trained staff were distributed across the various prisons, and the cost of local housing at Super 8 motels is still substantially cheaper than giving experienced staff overtime.) Put me on a joint executive branch - legislative branch study committee to save additional dollars and recommend what limited functions state government should do, and I’ll offer more ideas that I have had for a long time… - Speaking At Will - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 12:08 pm: == Hendon’s comment has been misconstrued as a call to corruption. It’s not. == Even if it isnt a “call to corruption” I dont think Hollywood should be dancing too close to this kind of statement. He is the same guy that threw away hundreds of thousands of dollars that were supposed to go to after school programs, and instead went to campaign workers. Hendon is part of the problem. - One of the 35 - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 12:33 pm: Legislators must be extremely nervous right about now. They have no stated plan to deal with the state’s economic woes and no one to blame for their lack of a solution. Now that they have a governor willing to work with them, what is the proposed course of action? - VanillaMan - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 12:55 pm: We have had six years of spectacular administrative, political and governmental failure. Illinoians have real reasons to grab torches and pitchforks and head for Springfield and the Thompson Center. We don’t even know the extent of the destuction from the Blagojevich administration. We’ll be finding skeletons in funding closets a year from now. The Blagojevich administration was the worst gubernatorial administration in our lifetime, a sheer amateur hour of stupidity. As the other shoes drop, Governor Quinn needs to establish a reputation for honesty and straight talk. Except for a few loonies in Chicago who still believe that golden geese and money trees exist, Illinois voters know that we are in deep do-do. This give Quinn an opportunity to demonstrate some tough love, but he has to do it by showing honesty, integrity and ethics. He has to appear to be governing - not politicking, or he will lose credibility for his proposed solutions. No new taxes until this state government owns up to the problems they have created. We need to see real cuts in programs, the elimination of several boards created for political chits, and addressing the structural deficits within the Illinois budget. Our state budget is a black hole, so throwing new taxes into it will not help. Even doubling our income tax will not get us to $5 billion. Expecting Illinois taxpayers to cough up more money to throw into what we all see as the worst state budget in the country is flat-out evil. Democrats will need to continue to curb their desire for easy answers via tax increases. Quinn’s tax proposal won’t generate enough to bail us out either. Just as the family of an alcoholic expect their loved one to stop drinking to demonstrate a good faith intention to mend their ways, Illinois taxpayers expect their government to stop sucking off billions and addressing the causes of our continued deficit before asking for help. Edgar is correct, because he has lived and experienced our decrepid General Assembly - if Illinoians give our state government another dime, they will not do what they have to do to spend that dime wisely. We have watched them put off this day of reckoning for a decade, and if we allow them to dig deeper into our pockets, our children’s piggy banks, and our grandchildren’s inheritances, they will not change how our money is wasted. Quinn has to make it clear - no tax increases, or new taxes until our fiscal house is in order. CUT! - Pot calling kettle - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 12:58 pm: It seems to me that the wise thing for Lisa M & Alexi G. to do is sit back and wait for 2014. They are both young, Lisa has small kids, there is no good reason not to wait. MJM can hang out in the Speakers chair a bit longer. If Quinn does a good job, he can win in 2010 and will probably step out in 2014 or 2018 at the latest. Lisa or Alexi have plenty of time to be Gov. A primary fight for Gov. could be very damaging to the party, and there’s no reason to follow the infighting path of the Republicans. - wordslinger - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 1:01 pm: Vman, just to be clear, Edgar backed making permanent the last temporary surcharge for education, along with the GA. Hartigan did not, and Edgar won. - Phil Collins - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 1:11 pm: Comptroller Hynes should run for the U.S. Senate. Att. Gen. Madigan should run for governor. Treasurer Giannoulias should run for lt. gov. - Reality Check - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 1:27 pm: Vanilla Man wrote: doubling our income tax will not get us to $5 billion Not true. An increase of 2 percentage points would net about $5 billion more to the state (as well as about half a billion to local governments). Of course, if a larger package included other tax reform components (e.g. expanding credits for working families or reducing property taxes) that amount would go down. Likewise, if it included other revenue components (broader sales tax base, closing corporate loopholes, motor fuel tax increase, etc.), it would go up. - Obamas' Puppy - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 1:27 pm: Political advise from Hollywood Hendon - HA that is the best joke I have heard today! - Sangamon Sage - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 1:31 pm: Wordslinger @ 1:01 There’s nothing more permanent than a temporary tax! - How Ironic - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 1:35 pm: VM- I always appreciate your thoughful posts. However, with regards to tax increases, IMHO you are incorrect. You almost sound a little like Cassandra. We can’t cut much of anything without having serious service cuts in social services. With the exception of free rides for seniors, I’m at a loss of what we can “trim”. The problem is that we have spent our way into a hole. We can’t “cut” bills that are due. We have an obligation to pay them. Like it or not, with Blago “holding the line” on a tax increase, we simply pushed the problem off until the day of reckoning. And we are now here. Our state income tax is very low. One of the lowest in the nation. We need about a 2% jump to about 5%. This would go a long way to paying down our outstanding obligations, and making our cash flow more even. No more budget “tricks”. Sweeps, paying bills late, or cutting “extra” programs is going to work. Anyway, that’s the way I see it. - wordslinger - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 1:52 pm: Sangamon Sage, if I recall correctly (this was 1992) there had been two temporary surcharges instituted at the end of Thompson years: one for education, one for local goverments. The education surcharge was made permanent and the local government surcharge was allowed to sunset. Sound right? Couldn’t find anything quickly on google. - Pot calling kettle - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 2:46 pm: Our income tax may be one of the lowest, but our property tax is among the higher. However, we do not have sales tax on most services nor is our income tax graduated. All of these factors make it difficult to compare our burden with other states. Any good tax plan would need to consider the whole system (sales, property, & income are the serious pieces) and consider the most appropriate and fair distribution. This should be done by looking at other states to see how they distribute the burden and the impact it has. We could do something similar with revenue distribution. There needs to be a clear picture of where the system is “broken” before an attempt is made to fix it. The other benefit of taking the time to do the research is that it provides justification for the resulting proposal. I suspect the appropriate research is already out there, so this need not be a long process. Unfortunately, the resulting plan would probably be politicized as an unfair burden on someone, and the resulting fight would eviscerate something that had a chance to work. - One of the 35 - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 2:49 pm: How Ironic - That’s not a 2% jump, that’s a 66% jump! - Rich Miller - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 2:50 pm: It’s a two percentage point jump. Let’s try not to be so over the top, please. - VanillaMan - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 3:00 pm: Until we address the structural deficits in our state budget, we should not expect our taxpayers to cough up more of their wages. It would be a waste as it would be quickly swallowed in the black hole that has been ignored by the General Assembly. No tax increases until our structural deficit is fixed. It would be a hardship on Illinoians for a temporary fix. We give Illinois state government enough of our money. No more. - Charlie Wheeler - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 3:14 pm: Historical note: In 1989, the individual income tax rate was increased to 3 percent from 2.5 percent for individuals and to 4.8 percent from 4 percent for corporate taxpayers, with proceeds divided evenly between education and local governments. The higher rates were to sunset in 1991, but that year the portion of the increase earmarked for education was made permanent and the portion earmarked for local governments was continued for two more years. In 1993, the local government portion also was made permanent. - wordslinger - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 3:17 pm: Thanks, Charlie Wheeler. - How Ironic - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 3:33 pm: @ Pot Property tax isn’t the same. While I don’t enjoy my rather high property taxes, it wouldn’t really matter to the state if those doubled. They don’t pay for the same things. Now, it would be nice if property taxes were lowered, but unless I’m mistaken, that is a local decision, not a state wide tax. @ One of the 35 I love your math. Thats what all the folks do when they want to make something seem larger. It’s a 2% jump in the tax rate. It is a 66% gain in the overall tax rate. Either way, Illinois would still have a very low tax rate relative to the rest of the nation. I don’t like taxes either. But to think we can cut our way out of this situation is delusional. It’s not that the budget is increasing. We just haven’t paid our past spending. And now the bill is due. We need a tax increase to cover it. Thats the long and the short of it. - Reality Check - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 3:45 pm: Vanilla Man wrote: Until we address the structural deficits in our state budget, we should not expect our taxpayers to cough up more of their wages. By definition, a structural deficit exists when collected revenue is insufficient to cover even simple inflationary growth in current spending. So raising revenue is one way to “address the structural deficit”. The other option, of course, is to cut. If that’s what you’re talking about, VM, please explain what services and how much funding you believe should be cut before raising revenue. (But keep in mind, for example, that total state payroll is about $3.5 billion - in other words, you could lay off every single state employee and not close the coming $5 billion gap.) - Reality Check - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 3:52 pm: Pot Calling Kettle: Any good tax plan would need to consider the whole system (sales, property, & income are the serious pieces) and consider the most appropriate and fair distribution. This should be done by looking at other states to see how they distribute the burden and the impact it has. … There needs to be a clear picture of where the system is “broken” before an attempt is made to fix it. … I suspect the appropriate research is already out there” Yes, it is already out there. Click http://tinyurl.com/blyu8t [PDF] for a “Citizen’s Guide to the Illinois State Budget and Tax System: A Primer on the Illinois Fiscal System and Budget Pressures.” - Cassandra - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 4:10 pm: It seems to me that every few years some civic organization comes out with a list of ways to better manage state revenues and spending and not all of them involve broadly raising the income or sales tax on the middle class or laying off state workers. Most of them sound eminently sensible but most of them offend powerful constituencies so they are considered nonstarters. Illinois, for example, is one of the few states that doesn’t tax pension income, regardless of the overall income of the pensioner. If you are a retiree with income of, say, $250,000 a year, which seems to be Obama and the Dems’ benchmark for identifying wealthy citizens, and $100,000 is pension income (including Social Security), you don’t pay state income tax on the pension income in Illinois. But the elderly are a powerful constituency and they have time to vote and to contact their legislators. Our legislators simply don’t have the gumption to make tough decisions. It’s not clear that Gov Quinn does either…we’ll have to see. But their cowardice doesn’t mean we should give up and pay up and assume they’ll make the best use of our tax monies. They won’t. - the Patriot - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 4:37 pm: Lisa Madigan can’t wait until 2014. The economy will be good by then and Quinn may have turned the state around. If she does not go in 2010, it may be 2018 before she has her shot. Second, in review of public comments and legal analysis of many situations old and new, each passing day she risks the public realizing she is not that smart or a great leader. I don’t want to bash her, but he is an average attorney who got where she is because of her father, end of story. Second, when will someone hold Mike Madigan accountable for this mess. He put each and every one of those budgets on the Governor’s desk. Yes he put on a show, but he signed off on them. He also endorsed the Governor twice. He is has to accept a share of the responsibility for this mess. He could have forced the Governor to come to Springfield and play by the rules but he did not. - VanillaMan - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 4:43 pm: By definition, a structural deficit exists when collected revenue is insufficient to cover even simple inflationary growth in current spending. So raising revenue is one way to “address the structural deficit”. Your definition is wrong. It takes a very real issue and belittles it so that your simple solution works. I am not an evil crumudgeon. Before you belittle what I am writing about, do a little research on how Illinois is terminally hosed under our current budgetary system and how it is billions is debt before it even spends a dime. We don’t even have to spend to be in debt right now. It isn’t as simple as you claim. Do some Googling. Our debt is not simply caused by spending too much, anymore than GM’s problem is just not making popular cars. Until we address the growing structural deficits, we will never get out from under our budget fiascos. Regardless of tax rates or budget cuts. - How Ironic - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 4:47 pm: VM, Yes, but if we don’t address our past due obligations, it really doesn’t matter what we cut. We need higher revenues to pay for the last 6 years of putting things off. The time for budget “tricks” are over. We need to raise taxes. Unless you can convince Bill Gates to drop 5 Billion to cover our shortfall. Let us know how that goes for you. - Rich Miller - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 4:48 pm: ===Our debt is not simply caused by spending too much=== Whoa!!! Is that really you? lol You’re right, of course. One reason for this structural deficit is that our tax structure doesn’t capture growth in the economy. Also, too many programs were simply put into the budget without realistically predicting spending growth, making the problem far worse than it should’ve been. - Reality Check - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 4:55 pm: VM - I don’t know where your vitriol is coming from. I am trying to have a calm, rational discussion. Can you explain a little more clearly and help me understand where we disagree? I stated that to address a deficit you can raise revenue or cut spending, or both. What else is there? - steve schnorf - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 4:58 pm: VM, I can’t track what you are saying about the definition of a structural deficit, our debt isn’t caused by simply spending too much, and we don’t even have to spend to be in debt. What is the correct definition of structural deficit? Tax increases and/or budget cuts seem to me to be the only ways you escape a structural (or any other kind of) debt. Google me something to help me understand. - With Liberty For All...... - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 6:34 pm: One more topic for the RB hangover, several good public servants (i.e. state employees) who weren’t too far into the retirement system left and aren’t coming back. I split because I couldn’t take working in government with his policies. I have a better job, making lot’s more and I am much happier. Also, we have merit based promotions. Something I wasn’t going to see under RB. Quinn needs to work on recruiting good talent so that government can operate more efficiently. - wordslinger - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 7:24 pm: Quinn’s on Chicago Tonight. Pressed by Carol Marin, he said that the budget deficit, ballpark, is “$5 billion, it could be twice that.” Said a lot of bills haven’t gone to the Comptroller’s Office yet. Nothing’s off the table, he said. - Bookworm - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 8:26 pm: “It could be TWICE THAT”?! Holy moley, that doesn’t sound good. I wonder if that wasn’t the real reason whatshisname didn’t want to be governor anymore… he wanted to get outta Dodge before the crap hit the fan, as it was bound to do with the recession coming on. I have a feeling that when the full extent of what the Former Non-Occupant did to this state is revealed, his very name will itself become an expletive to all Illinois residents. - Am I the only one - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 9:48 pm: Am I the only one who finds it bizarre that Pat has yet to name his core leadership team? I mean he had 7 weeks notice this was coming. - steve schnorf - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 9:52 pm: It isn’t twice $5B. - wordslinger - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 10:14 pm: Steve, I was quite shocked by Quinn’s statement. Marin didn’t follow up. Someone will tomorrow, I imagine. - Bookworm - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 10:17 pm: You sure about that Steve? That does sound awfully high but then again, Former Gov. Goofy never ceases to amaze… - Pot calling kettle - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 10:20 pm: ==It isn’t twice $5B== It may be if you include skipped pension payments. Pension payments that have been foregone are obligations. - steve schnorf - Monday, Feb 2, 09 @ 11:08 pm: My assumption is that the 2010 payment under the ramp-up is paid in full. - 47th Ward - Tuesday, Feb 3, 09 @ 5:04 pm: VM, I’m still waiting for one suggestion from you. One suggestion of a meaningful cut in spending. Just one. Where do you propose we cut? How much will that save? Feel free to add any additional savings you can offer, but until then, please spare us the anti-tax diatribes. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.